Fugue Icons

[timmay2019]

Hey everybody,

Even though an icon set may have already been chosen I would like to mention the Fugue icon set anyways from http://p.yusukekamiyamane.com/.
I thought these icons look professional and to me has a windows kinda look/feel. It is under a Creative Commons Attribution License 3 though so I don't know if it can be added to this project.

It would be great to get some feedback on it.

Thanks

[jonaspm]

They can't be added due to the license

[Harteex]

They can't be added due to the license

Why? It's quite common to have different licenses for code and for assets.

[erkinalp]

It would result in license self-contradiction.

[milon]

How so? I took a look when timmay2019 first posted, and it seems to me that they're just asking that you give credit to the author. I feel like I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what.

[PurpleGurl]

How so? I took a look when timmay2019 first posted, and it seems to me that they're just asking that you give credit to the author. I feel like I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what.

The straight CC-BY license seems to be the most compatible. The least compatible would be the CC BY-NC-ND (attribution, noncommercial, no derivatives) and CC BY-NC-SA (attribution, noncommercial, share-alike). One big problem would be if we were already using things licensed under an incompatible CC license. The stronger licenses could nullify the lesser restrictive ones or even make a finished work unable to be shared.

You have to keep in mind that "commercial" in terms of using a work doesn't necessarily mean selling it. Taking someone else's song, adding a photo montage to it, and uploading it to YouTube is technically considered commercial use, even if a child is doing it for free. So if someone wants to use a CC BY-NC licensed song like that, they would have to ask the author for explicit permission or even pay royalties in some cases, while they can safely use it like that without asking for permission under CC-BY. The idea behind Creative Commons is for the authors to give certain types of permissions in advance. So with a plain CC license, you can use it and freely distribute it, modify it, and use it commercially so long as the license terms and attribution are given.

Under the GNU license, you are allowed to sell what you produce under it, as long as you share the source code. You would not get in trouble for selling Linux for $100 a copy. However, it would hardly ever sell at that price because anyone can download the distros themselves for free.

[milon]

Thank you for the info, PurpleGurl. I'd like a more specific answer, if anyone can. What's wrong with this particular icon set? Again, the license seems to be asking only for the author to be credited. And I don't see any of the licensing "codes" that PurpleGurl referred to (again - maybe I'm just missing something).

[erkinalp]

Icons are bitmap, not vector graphics on ReactOS, so source code will be needed. Bitmap file binaries are considered object code. (We need source codes to be both human and computer readable, not just for GPL compliance, but also for ability to build everything including the artwork from scratch). If they were SVG, we could say "source code is the SVG file itself".

[timmay2019]

Thanks everyone for their feedback. The author has PSD files as the source so I'm not sure if that means anything. Also I would note that most of the icons are in 16px by 16px. I asked the author if he has the icons in a bigger size but he unfortunately hasn't at the moment.

[Harteex]

Icons are bitmap, not vector graphics on ReactOS, so source code will be needed. Bitmap file binaries are considered object code. (We need source codes to be both human and computer readable, not just for GPL compliance, but also for ability to build everything including the artwork from scratch). If they were SVG, we could say "source code is the SVG file itself".

As said, it's common that projects license content/assets in a different license from the actual code. For example Quake which is GPL, but the datafiles are not.
That means the assets doesn't have to comply to GPL.

Also regarding bitmap files considered object code, do you have any source on that? Are you saying you can't license a bitmap file under the GPL?

[Black_Fox]

There's the PSD download available as well, but the icons are 16x16 only (with very few exceptions). That's completely unusable.