License file needed #21

To be able to make this official, we need a license file confirmed by original asset authors, also to avoid issues like get-it-on/pages#2.

@mray : most of of the content has been authored by you; anybody else needed to confirm?

What is a license file?

By convention a file named "LICENSE" in the root of the repository defining the license(s) and exceptions for the repo. Sometimes containing full license text, sometimes just the name(s) of the license(s) and the link(s) to the full text.

(main reason to insist is basically to avoid confusion as we had seen here: having a single definite source of truth avoids ambiguities)

Thanks for the clarification.
I now understand, but since this isn't code and the license information is already in the included readme.txt in the downloadable Logo-Kit, on the branding guideline page and inside the the metadata of the orignal svg files – do you still think that's necessary?

(That's me just avoiding clutter, I ses how that's making things coherent from a coders point of view, though ;) )

I suppose, just go ahead and add that file in any version you like, if you want.

It would be good to have exceptions that allow the usage of the logo in the badge as well as on sites operated by Codeberg e.V. without the need for attribution / indication of license.

Then again, there will be forks of Codeberg's own sites and the badge generator repository. So there probably needs to be a term allowing forks that are intended to be reintegrated into the main repository. This could get a bit complicated if we think this through to the end.

An alternative would be to put the logo under CC0 and to try to defend against abuse using trademark law. We can still ask for voluntary attribution, where appropriate. That would make life a lot easier for anyone wanting to use the Codeberg logo (e.g. in the badge).

Not sure if with CC0 we give away the right to defend anything.

AFAIK, with CC0 we'd give away our rights under copyright and neighboring rights to the maximum extent possible, but it explicitly reserves trademark rights in section 4a:

No trademark or patent rights held by Affirmer are waived, abandoned, surrendered, licensed or otherwise affected by this document.

See https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode for details.

This is my interpretation too.

Yes, I think you're right.

I think we can close this?

Well I think I would have to re-upload an svg (embedded metadata) and readme.xt in the logo-kit that makes it clear that the logo is CC0.