[Bf-committers] copyright and suzanne

[Tom M]

Reply,

> Another example: MakeHuman (also GPL). Does that mean
> that any work using MakeHuman would fall under the
> GPL?
>

Yep, which is why we need to put a specific exclusion in the makehuman
license for renderings as well.  If you look at poser, daz, and other
3d object/content sellers, they all put in a specific exclusion for
renders of the content, most also put it an exclusion for derivatives
such as morph targets, or textures based off of the uv maps.  Without
the license exclusions the content would be a derivative work and thus
the original copyright holder would have control over it.

> No offense, but this just sounds overly complicated
> for nothing.

I can understand that view, but alas, it is the way copyright works. 
For instance making a collage out of photos from magazines is also a
derivative work.  There are all sorts of things that we as reasonable
people think ought to be covered by fair use but, court cases have
shown that this is not the case.  (Ie see the relatively recent
successful lawsuits that were won based on 'sampling'.).  While I'm
not overly concerned about this, I prefer to have such issues
explicitly spelled out to avoid problems.
 
> That was quite clear to me since any output would be
> straight copies from the code.

How so?  I could do a screenshot of both the logo and of the startup
screen, no copying from the code required.  They just happen to be
output at startup/runtime as opposed to being output based on a key
combination.

LetterRip