Using CC icons on your Website?
Each of the icons listed that employs a CC license may be using one of several different variations. Therefore, you must check with each author to make sure you comply with his or her wishes. CC licenses may specify non-commercial use / and or author attribution — no bid deal really.
Using LGPL (and GPL) icons on your Website?
Icons released under the LGPL be used for:
1. personal site
2. commercial site
3. shareware application
4. l/gpled application (and this is the only case I’m sure they can)
5. web communities
6. proprietary applications.Note that you cannot:
1 - Release LGPL icons or images based on them if your icons are under proprietary license / restrictions. - Meaning: your icons or images based on them should always be free, even if they are part of a proprietary software / commercial site.
2 - Distribute LGPL icons or images based on them without license / copyright notice. People have to know this is LGPL, not public domain. Note that they do not have to make the source available, but they have to make them available on request (for free).
What can anyone do with images based on a LGPL iconset:
Images that are derivatives of LGPL iconset should be available as LGPL as well. You have the right to ask for the source (the png) files for these images, and add to your theme or whatever. They should always be free.
— [stolen from]
02 Mar 07
11:45 am
I’m an ignorant developer wanting to do the right thing. I’m currently working on a commercial web-application, part of which is only accessble by our employees, part of which is is only accessible by our partners, and part of which is open to the public.
I’m admiring all the great icons that are being made available, but I’m a bit confused by the intent of the different licenses. Like code, icons can be modified, incorporated into larger collections of icons, distributed (as originally received or incorporated in a larger collection), or any combination of these. As a developer it’s perfectly clear to me how the licenses pertain to these activities, e.g. with the LGPL license you can modify the originals without any obligation on your part, however if you distribute your modified versions you must also make them (and also the originals) available for free/libre.
My confusion is about using an icon on a web-page. For an application, the incorporation of a module with a GPL licence, leads to an obligation to provide source-code to the end-user for the entire application — which doesn’t translate directly to this domain… The intention behind the GPL is that the community should benefit if a commercial entity uses a GPL licensed module, ie. feel free to use commercially, as long as the community can benefit from your code the same way you benefitted from theirs. The LGPL is a bit more restricted, ie. feel free to use this special functionality provided you contribute any changes you make back to the community. Legally you only need to do so if you distribute your work, but the intention is that you give back.
What is the intention behind the choice of licensing terms for icons? Do they seek to limit their use on commercial sites or only commercial re-distribution? Is a commercial site defined by the entity it belongs to, or by the user-group/audience/inteded-use of a site/page/app? E.g. if my company puts up a page for the local high-school ski-team on our domain, is that considered commercial?
22 Jun 07
12:41 pm
I am also seeking an answer. Can I use GPL or LGPL icons,not modified, on my commercial web app and web sites. And doing so must my web app be under GPL?
28 Feb 09
6:54 pm
Anyone who is interested in this question should read this: https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-quality/2004-June/000639.html