Using Wesnoth art in other GPL projects...?

[irrevenant]

The GPL isn't a very good license for images, but Wesnoth uses it. Distributing Wesnoth's images along with a game which is not available under terms at least as permissive as the GPL is breaking the license.

That really comes down to what a "derivative work" is with regard to art. Generally it's been considered that (eg.) a sprite based on a Wesnoth sprite is a derivative work, but that a program that displays that sprite is not, any more than MS Word is a "derivative work" of your GPLed novel saved in MS Word format.

This is probably a fairly safe assumption, but I guess we won't know for sure until it's tested in court.

[mirwen]

Ok, if i understand, to use images, I must at least signal that they are all under a GPL license and so freely avaiable for anyone who accept the license.
And it is possible that the game may be considered as a derivative work too and must be fully under GPL; but for now the situation of a game that is under GPL for only a part of it hasnt been seen.
Thanks for your answers, is it necessary to signal the wesnoth team or the drawers of the images that we use it or writing that they are under GPL license on our site is enough?

[Thumper]

That really comes down to what a "derivative work" is with regard to art. Generally it's been considered that (eg.) a sprite based on a Wesnoth sprite is a derivative work, but that a program that displays that sprite is not, any more than MS Word is a "derivative work" of your GPLed novel saved in MS Word format.

Meh. Technically Wesnoth's WML files aren't integral to the game binaries, so you could argue that Wesnoth is really a "WML reader". It clearly isn't in the spirit of the license to allow distribution of non-binary GPL components to be defined as mere aggregation rather than derivation. But as you say, nothing like that's gone to court yet. I certainly wouldn't consider it to be broadly accepted by the community.

Ok, if i understand, to use images, I must at least signal that they are all under a GPL license and so freely avaiable for anyone who accept the license.
And it is possible that the game may be considered as a derivative work too and must be fully under GPL; but for now the situation of a game that is under GPL for only a part of it hasnt been seen.

Yes, you've gotten it exactly.

is it necessary to signal the wesnoth team or the drawers of the images that we use it or writing that they are under GPL license on our site is enough?

You don't "need" to notify the original authors, but in this case it would be very wise to ask them for permission just in case. You do need to provide copyright information and a note about the GPL with the software.

- Chris

[Anym]

I read the full GPL license text but i'm french and i dont understand all the meanings of the text .

Just thought I'd point out that there's a French translation of the GPL as well.

[AI]

What language legalese is written in has little bearing on it's readability for mere mortals.

[irrevenant]

That really comes down to what a "derivative work" is with regard to art. Generally it's been considered that (eg.) a sprite based on a Wesnoth sprite is a derivative work, but that a program that displays that sprite is not, any more than MS Word is a "derivative work" of your GPLed novel saved in MS Word format.

Meh. Technically Wesnoth's WML files aren't integral to the game binaries, so you could argue that Wesnoth is really a "WML reader".

Sure. The WML files don't have to be licensed under the GPL either. In Wesnoth, they are, but that's through choice, not necessity. They're data files, not part of the game's source code.

ID Software have done a similar thing with their source release of Doom/Quake/etc. where they open sourced the game, but you require a copy of the original game's WAD files containing all the game content in order to use it. (Unless you recreate all the data from scratch like this project is).

[Iris]

ID Software have done a similar thing with their source release of Doom/Quake/etc. where they open sourced the game, but you require a copy of the original game's WAD files containing all the game content in order to use it. (Unless you recreate all the data from scratch like this project is).

Is that legal? Making a clone of a propietary game in terms of artwork and everything originally published under a non-free license?

[Blarumyrran]

i dont recognize any artwork on freedooms screenshots as total clones of the original dooms images.

[Iris]

Oh well, then the concept I meant.

[irrevenant]

ID Software have done a similar thing with their source release of Doom/Quake/etc. where they open sourced the game, but you require a copy of the original game's WAD files containing all the game content in order to use it. (Unless you recreate all the data from scratch like this project is).

Is that legal? Making a clone of a proprietary game in terms of artwork and everything originally published under a non-free license?

Again, I don't think it's ever been tested in court, but AFAIK it should be fine so long as the art is distinctive from the original. They're not violating the terms of the licence and they're not copying anything.