Re: [Xiph-Advocacy] Artwork resources.

There's some inaccurate information on what Ian said.

On 2/7/08, Ian Malone <[email protected]> wrote:
> WikiMedia.

Cory was actually correct in saying WIkipedia.  It's two different
issues we are discussing here.  A Wikipedian contacted Monty asking if
it was possible to free license some or all of the Xiph project logos.
 Monty, according to this Wikipedian, replied that "we would discuss"
the matter.  I have no idea if a decision was made.

> Wikimedia is being used to host resources for
> SpreadOgg and will not accept files that aren't licensed at
> least share-alike.  Thus under current arrangements
> SpreadOgg resources must have that licensing

Spread Open Media.  We dropped that other name a year ago.  All the
content of SOM is either available under the Public Domain or CC-BY.
The rationale is that being SOM a project to promote free formats, it
makes sense to allow people to use our stuff with the lowest possible
restrictions.

> Xiph logos in general are not subject to this rule and you might
> argue it's not desirable since control of the logos is one
> of the few ways Xiph can try to enforce conformance.

Indeed.

That is actually something I told Cory.  SOM material is the one
that's supposed to be used to promote free formats, and if Cory really
wants to join in the fun this would be the right place.

-Ivo