[Dev] GIMP is not libre (GIMP-LIBRE soon)

[Luke T.Shumaker]

Hopefully it is just a misunderstanding. However, if GIMP really is
non-libre, we should file a bug report or send an email to some GNU
list, as part of the GNU project, if we have libre issues with it, so
does GNU.

~ Luke Shumaker

At Sat, 05 May 2012 13:39:25 +0200,
Michał Masłowski wrote:
> [1  <multipart/signed (7bit)>]
> [1.1  <text/plain (7bit)>]
> > Hi guys, yesterday gimp 2.8 was released and include a splash screen
> > that doesn't respect our freedom
> > http://www.gimpusers.com/news/00420-gimp-2-8-finally-released
> >
> > "This work by Richard Hirner is licensed under the
> > Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported terms."
> 
> I know these other facts:
> 
> - http://www.gimpusers.com/news/00419-gsoc-2012-gimp-gegl-projects has a
>   similar caption
> 
> - the LICENSE file in gimp-2.8.0 source states this:
> 
> * The GIMP application core, and other portions of the official GIMP
>   distribution not explicitly licensed otherwise, are licensed under
>   the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE -- see the 'COPYING' file in this
>   directory for details.
> 
> - the data/images/gimp-splash.png file has no license-related metadata
>   and no other file in obvious place like that directory states any
>   copying information
> 
> - you haven't posted any reference to the GIMP source here.
> 
> I believe this caption is incorrect or refers to the review instead of
> to the image.  So it's not a problem in the GIMP or Parabola.
> [1.2  <application/pgp-signature (7bit)>]
> 
> [2  <text/plain; us-ascii (7bit)>]
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabolagnulinux.org
> https://lists.parabolagnulinux.org/mailman/listinfo/dev