Open ghost opened 1 year ago
Would this count? It's on the website footer, by the way.
It really depends on the license(s) each logo falls under, because even without monetization, they may require attribution (or forward-compliance).
I’m not a legal-consultant, so I can’t say anything with confidence, but I would imagine for most licenses the disclaimer is enough. I'll recant my previous statement of possibility repo-legal-trouble, because as I said I’m not a lawyer, but I would recommend legal-consultation, if possible.
Including the license(s) with the logos still helps developers a great deal, and would be a big step forward for general license-compliance.
I have searched through the issues and didn't find my problem.
Problem
Currently, logo-licenses are not included in the repository. Any person wanting to comply with logo-license(s) has to find it individually - which can become inconvenient.
Projects are becoming more license-aware, and having convenient place to find the related-license(s) would be extremely helpful from a licensing-perspective.
Possible Solution
Using this REUSE guideline, all logos can be licensed gradually. For reference, the standard being by REUSE is SPDX ShortForm.
Additional information
There’s also an element of self-preservation.
Though it is not typically enforced, having a logo-repository without the logos' corresponding license(s) may lead to big trouble down-the-road.