requesting permission from George to release Prime95 screenshot under GPL

[ixfd64]

Originally Posted by retina

That screenshot in the first post also contains some MS Windows components (the close button, etc.). Do we also need to ask MS for permission to post that?

And the font used might be under some other license to another company. Do we need to ask permission for that?

It all seems a bit ridiculous on WPs part. What's the big deal anyway?

We actually do allow some works with copyrighted elements as long as those elements are incidental: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:De_minimis

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by ixfd64

George: apologies for bothering you again about this, but could you please explicitly confirm that users may publish Prime95 screenshots under any free license, including public domain?

Perhaps the best solution is to change the EULA to allow users to freely modify and distribute screenshots of GIMPS software, and use them for any purpose.

What a bother.

What text exactly needs to be added to where? I'm assuming license.txt and perhaps including a link/copy of the license.txt file on the download page. Anything else?

I personally hate GPL. It's like a poison pill. Include one line of GPL code in a 100,000 line program and all of a sudden you're required to use GPL on all 100,000 lines of code. Absurd. So go with some other public domain license and narrow it down to screen shots but not source code and results -- and in such a way that wikimedia is happy.

[ixfd64]

Originally Posted by Prime95

What a bother.

What text exactly needs to be added to where? I'm assuming license.txt and perhaps including a link/copy of the license.txt file on the download page. Anything else?

I personally hate GPL. It's like a poison pill. Include one line of GPL code in a 100,000 line program and all of a sudden you're required to use GPL on all 100,000 lines of code. Absurd. So go with some other public domain license and narrow it down to screen shots but not source code and results -- and in such a way that wikimedia is happy.

The screenshots don't really need to be under the GPL or similar license. I arbitrarily chose the GPL when I made this thread because it was the most common license at the time. Only later did I realize that the GPL was more for code rather than things like screenshots. We now prefer Creative Commons for the latter.