Dolphin Bathrooms (https://www.dolphinbathrooms.com.au) use the Dolphin Emulator Logo as their logo.
![[Image: dolphin-bathrooms-logo.png?crc=4167263824]](https://www.dolphinbathrooms.com.au/images/dolphin-bathrooms-logo.png?crc=4167263824)
I don't know if it's copyright, so I brought it to attention.
![[Image: dolphin-bathrooms-logo.png?crc=4167263824]](https://www.dolphinbathrooms.com.au/images/dolphin-bathrooms-logo.png?crc=4167263824)
I don't know if it's copyright, so I brought it to attention.
Dolphin Emulator Logo used as logo for other brand
|
07-23-2024, 12:17 PM
Dolphin Bathrooms (https://www.dolphinbathrooms.com.au) use the Dolphin Emulator Logo as their logo.
![]() I don't know if it's copyright, so I brought it to attention. 07-23-2024, 10:37 PM
So Dolphin's 2013 logo was licensed under the public domain, so anyone can use it for anything they want. There's nothing we can do about it.
Largely do to that experience, for our new logo (which I still need to apply to this forum actually, oops) I went with CC BY-SA 4.0. ![]() Intel Xeon w7-3465X OC | Asus Pro WS W790-E Sage SE | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 FE | 8x16GiB G-Skill Zeta R5 DDR5-6000 | Windows 11 23H2 | (details)
MacBook Pro 14in | M1 Max (32 GPU Cores) | 64GB LPDDR5 6400 | macOS 13
07-24-2024, 02:26 AM
(07-23-2024, 10:37 PM)MayImilae Wrote: Largely do to that experience, for our new logo (which I still need to apply to this forum actually, oops) I went with CC BY-SA 4.0. There's no note of this in the Dolphin repo, so I've been assuming for the time being that the addition of the logo to the Dolphin repo follows the same license as Dolphin as a whole, that being the GPL, version 2 or later. Would it be alright to consider the logo dual licensed under GPLv2+ and CC BY-SA 4.0? It's just that having to keep CC BY-SA 4.0 notices around in the Dolphin repo and Dolphin binaries would be a bit of a hassle. 07-24-2024, 02:49 AM
Well, CC BY-SA 4.0 is pretty similar to GPL, so that's probably fine?
I don't believe there was any declaration of the license in our code before, otherwise I would have adjusted it. But we could add it. ![]() Intel Xeon w7-3465X OC | Asus Pro WS W790-E Sage SE | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 FE | 8x16GiB G-Skill Zeta R5 DDR5-6000 | Windows 11 23H2 | (details)
MacBook Pro 14in | M1 Max (32 GPU Cores) | 64GB LPDDR5 6400 | macOS 13
07-24-2024, 11:08 PM
I don't think that works. CC BY-SA 4.0 is compatible with the GPL 3 but not the GPL 2 (based on some cursory googling), so even including the icon in a compiled Dolphin build isn't allowed as it's GPL 2+ and the GPL 2 permissions don't satisfy the share-alike part. It could be argued that you've already released the icon as GPL 2+ by putting it in a repo whose licence says it's GPL 2+ (that same mechanism is probably how the previous icon worked as, except in weird countries like France where public domain doesn't mean the same thing as in the rest of the world, you can relicense other people's public domain works as any licence you want, so there's no need to include a separate licence). It's also probably easiest to just pretend you did that on purpose - clearly you intended the icon to be used in a GPL 2+ project, and so you must have intended it to be also released under a GPL 2+ compatible licence.
OS: Windows 10 64 bit Professional
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900X RAM: 48GB GPU: Radeon 7800 XT 07-24-2024, 11:15 PM
But GPLv2+ means it can be interpreted as GPLv3. So if CC BY-SA 4.0 is compatible with GPLv3, we can dual license.
![]() Intel Xeon w7-3465X OC | Asus Pro WS W790-E Sage SE | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 FE | 8x16GiB G-Skill Zeta R5 DDR5-6000 | Windows 11 23H2 | (details)
MacBook Pro 14in | M1 Max (32 GPU Cores) | 64GB LPDDR5 6400 | macOS 13
07-25-2024, 03:39 AM
Isn't the point of dual licensing so you can use it with potentially incompatible ones? Like, the icon is CC BY-SA 4.0 for everyone, but it is GPLv2+ for Dolphin specifically.
Or did I misunderstand what this means from the point of the one granting the license? 07-25-2024, 04:11 AM
What I mean by dual licensing is making the material available through two different licenses and letting people pick which of those licenses they want to use the work under. This doesn't require the licenses to be compatible with each other.
07-25-2024, 04:47 AM
GPL 2+ can be interpreted as GPL 2 or GPL 3. If you're supplying a project as GPL 2+ it therefore needs to be usable under either of those licences without causing problems. It's like putting a sticker on an electrical appliance saying it works with 110 or 240 VAC - the person using it should be able to plug it into a US or European outlet without problems, and if you've included a component that's only rated for 110 V that'll blow up at 240 V, that's a problem, even though it's not a problem for the subset of users in the US.
It's okay to dual licence the icon as CC BY-SA 4.0 and GPL 2+ (effectively the same as triple-licencing it as CC BY-SA 4.0, GPL 2 and GPL 3) or dual licence it as CC BY-SA 4.0 and GPL 2 (as the CC one already lets people sublicence as GPL 3 and it's a safe bet that the GPL 4 won't break that if it ever happens) as both these options let people use the combined work as if it's GPL 2 or GPL 3. You can't leave it as CC BY-SA 4.0 only as while that lets people use the combined work as if it's GPL 3, they can't use it as if it's GPL 2, but Dolphin's licence tells them they can.
OS: Windows 10 64 bit Professional
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900X RAM: 48GB GPU: Radeon 7800 XT 08-30-2024, 12:00 PM
(07-23-2024, 10:37 PM)MayImilae Wrote: So Dolphin's 2013 logo was licensed under the public domain, so anyone can use it for anything they want. There's nothing we can do about it. * due |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|