263
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
263 points (100.0% liked)
/kbin meta
2 readers
1 users here now
Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign
founded 1 year ago
BY-SA is officially listed as one way compatible with the GPL (basically you can distribute a BY-SA asset under the GPL), with the detailed analysis shown here. Kbin is under the AGPL which to my knowledge is not listed as compatible, but it should be fine as AGPL is basically GPL with the condition that the source must be released if the modified program is run on a server and not directly distributed. Keep in mind that BY-SA does allow commercial use and basically is the art equivalent of software's GPL.
IMO the cleanest way to do this would be to distribute Kibby under AGPL directly to Codeberg or grant rights under a custom agreement if Ernest wants this to be the official mascot. Alternatively the Kibby asset could be released under a second license and people hosting their own Kbin instances would have to comply with the second license to use the mascot. This could work as Kibby isn't required for Kbin to function instance owner could easily substitute a different image if they don't agree with the license.