Open source, closed source, and the value of code

J. Landman Gay jacque at
Wed Mar 2 01:06:38 EST 2016

On 3/1/2016 11:41 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>> On 2 Mar 2016, at 4:35 PM, J. Landman Gay
>> <jacque at> wrote:
>> Does that sound right to all you guys who read up on this stuff?
> I believe any media or other content (whether separate files or not)
> distributed with the application and/or required to make it function
> fully would need to be licensed in a GPL compatible license.

Two hypotheticals:

1. I create a viewer app to display my original artwork as part of my 
job-seeking resume. The viewer seems useful so I decide to distribute it 
to others so they can make their own resumes. I include at least some of 
my artwork in the distribution so that potential users can see how the 
app works, but I don't want them to use my artwork in their own resumes. 
I decide to license my artwork restrictively, but the viewer app is GPL. 
I would think separate licensing in that case would be okay. The app 
doesn't depend on my particular artwork, it only needs something to 
display. (I know I could include media that is public domain instead, 
but that's not the point.)

2. I create an app that teaches the history of medieval art. The artwork 
is mostly public domain, but some of the illustrations, maps, whatever 
are my own creations. The stack doesn't work without the media, and the 
text in the app describes it. In that case I need to license everything 
as GPL because the app isn't functional without the supporting files.


Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at
HyperActive Software           |

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list