← index #79Issue #1002
Off-topic · high · value 0.344
QUERY · ISSUE

logo licenses

openby redteam316opened 2014-01-05updated 2024-08-28

The MicroPython logos in the master branch currently have no license affiliated with them beyond the SIL license that was used for the text. The MIT license would apply to the source code/project as a whole but when used as standalone images (for blogs, websites, etc...) this isn't clear as the MIT license was meant for software, not art.

Considering this, if the logos are to be dual licensed, I propose for the logos to be used under the MIT license or optionally as CC-BY (which is the closest CC license to MIT license AFAIK).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode

The Debian project does this, which makes it absolutely clear what the terms for logo use are(but you will notice they use a more restrictive CC license that matches their code license):
http://www.debian.org/logos/

Here are other notable examples of how other projects handle this, some being unclear on licensing of the logos, yet provide guidelines or attempt to explain proper usage or what you cannot do with them:
http://qt.digia.com/About-us/Logos-for-Download/
http://www.kickstarter.com/help/style_guide
http://oshwlogo.com/
http://arduino.cc/en/Trademark/CommunityLogo
http://copyheart.org/
http://design.ubuntu.com/brand/ubuntu-logo
http://beagleboard.org/media
http://developer.android.com/distribute/googleplay/promote/brand.html
http://makezine.com/press-center/logos-banners/

I think having such a page on the wiki(or better yet, the micropython.org site) that provides this similar information would be good.

CANDIDATE · ISSUE

Missing license information for modules

closedby vikram-rana-synapticsopened 2025-04-24updated 2025-11-13

In the LICENSE file, it is made clear that each module is separately licensed, and that licenses should be inferred from the files with that module directory. However, there are a number of modules that do not have any associated licensing information. The datetime module, for instance, contains no licensing information. How should we infer the licensing for these modules?

2 comments
sheeshee · 2025-05-15

+1 to this. I am copying individual files (ssd1306.py, ntptime.py so far) into my project and would like to preserve their licenses, but it's not clear which license applies to each.

Josverl · 2025-05-15

The license file also states :

Files not belonging to a particular module are provided under the MIT
license, unless explicitly stated otherwise.

logic then says that hen there is no explicit license for a module / folder , that then MIT license applies.

Keyboard

j / / n
next pair
k / / p
previous pair
1 / / h
show query pane
2 / / l
show candidate pane
c
copy suggested comment
r
toggle reasoning
g i
go to index
?
show this help
esc
close overlays

press ? or esc to close

copied