Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
November 2016 Archives by date, by thread · List index


https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #16 from Christoph Schäfer <christoph-schaefer@gmx.de> ---
(In reply to Rene Engelhard from comment #14)
What's the problem with this licence? We (freeColour) discussed the licensing > options with an 
IP lawyer

that is probably the problem.

and came to the conclusion that, to guarantee the > same outcome on all
platforms and the reliability of the physical colour reference in connection
with any programme, the ND option is the best.

Your opinion. But it violates the open source Defnition. Remember you are
contributing to a open source project (or well, Heiko did).

https://opensource.org/osd-annotated

So it's not something we should ship. 

I've had this discussion in other contexts already, and the major concern was > that using any 
of the colours in a document creates  a derivative. This is 
*not* true. Using a colour is what is says: use, which is not limited by the
licence.

I didn't claim so. Still you can't modify it.

The ND option only serves to guarantee the correctness of the colour values
and the related colour codes. You can compare it to an open standard. The ODF > spec would be 
useless if anyone could modify the text 

But a "random" color palette is not a standard. And saying that, by Debians
standards (DFSG, which the OSD is actually based on) standard texts or RFCs
are not suitable for Debian main either.


First of all, a colour palette is not code, it's content, so the Open Source
defifinition doesn't apply here.

Second, you can modify the palette. What you can't do is modify it and
distribute it under the same name, pretending it's the original version. The
colours themselves are (s)RGB values, which means they cannot be protected.
Everyone can modify the colour values and distribute a new palette, provided
they remove the colour codes (names) and any relationship with fF / fC and the
physical colour reference.

Third, this is not a "random" palette. It's a colour collection that has been
created with a lot of research and testing behind it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.