no problem with combining them easy to do. and hulahoop can join us with his choices but i think hes not here from about 1 week or so?
sorry, but I’ll have to be to be “that guy”. The use of images which aren’t strictly marked as CC is a very complex and hard to tackle manner and, while the developers behind Qubes will certainly not sue, other people/organisations may act differently. In case of the Qubes-logo for example, the following may be found about it on its Wikipedia-page:
This is a logo of an organisation, item, or event, and is protected by copyright. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, of logos for certain uses involving identification and critical commentary may qualify as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. Certain commercial use of this image may also be trademark infringement.
This means, that as far as American law is actually concerned, using a lowres version of the picture is ok, as long as it is used purely for information and/or education reasons, as the Qubes-logo seems to not be explicitly covered under any iteration of CC. Now, the thing is that, as far as I know, Patrick is residing in Germany, were these laws are far more strict and are often the reason for legal trouble.
Now, please keep in mind, that I’m not just saying this out of nothing, because this is a problem which I had to deal with a while back in a German forum I moderated.
So, in conclusion, if the pictures aren’t CC or there is an explicit statement by the content owner, which states that their work may be used, I’d rather use simple self made “imitations”, if you have some ideas, I might be able to create something worthwhile in GIMP.
Have a nice day,
i think patrick can talk with qubes team about this no ? or increase the size of the images.
im actually laughing that there is a laws for a pic on the internet. (no offense but really silly).
of course, in the case of the “Qubes-devs”, this should be possible to settle through proper communication, my post was mainly attributed to pictures in general, the logo of Qubes was just a perfect example, as it is already in use. Now, whether such a law is necessary or not is of course debatable, though I actually can see a certain necessity for it, as digital property should, at least in my eyes, receive the same kind of protection, as “analogue” intellectual property. That this kind of protection in general can go to far (something we currently can witness with the “Leistungsschutsrecht/Protection of done work” or for years with the German GEMA) is of course undeniable, though that doesn’t make protection in general bad for content producers.
By the way, the “KVM-logo” is licensed under CC and may be redistributed and modified by anyone, as long as credit is given properly.
Have a nice day,
if im living as a fully anonymous in your countries i wouldnt care for laws.we r actually protecting ppl from laws lol. but yeah for me i dont like anyone get hurt or pay any fees for a pathetic pic made by electrons… so yeah i should consider this in ur cases then.
thought once im oppressed with laws where i do live but it seems that we r in the same packet or me even more freely on the internet.
Qubes logo source:
Qubes logo license:
ok, sorry, I was mainly using Wikipedia as the source, if that’s the case I might have to change it on there then.
Have a nice day,
I cut the textual part “KVM” from the KVM logo and left the symbol. Looks better now.
A lot categories have images now. Please suggest images for the missing ones.
great then . what do u think of this as an apparmor logo?
not sure about their licenses not getting it is it free to use or not:-
for the recycle bin choose one of these:-
AppArmor logo is already done.
Shutterstock is [only?] commercial.
for Tor and general anonymity i see the best choice is to put anonymous logo since it means also everyone (general) can be anonymous (included Tor and everything related to it).
choose one of these:-
license i couldnt know:- https://tad-do.net/tag/anonymous/
license is free:- http://www.resimsi.com/preview/large/10649/anonymous-4.html
license DMCA:- http://wallpapers55.com/dcma/
(u can cut/resize the choose able image)
I think we should not use the anonymous logo, because in that context that label doesn’t apply here.
ok np , c these for example:-
license:- i think no ?:- https://guardianproject.info/apps/
license:- GNU Lesser General Public License
license i couldnt know:- http://www.control4.com/blog/2015/02/securing-your-connected-life
for arabic support section put:-
http://www.iconarchive.com/show/characters-icons-by-dooffy/0-Question-mark-icon.html freeware is bad. But http://www.iconarchive.com/show/red-orb-alphabet-icons-by-iconarchive/Question-mark-icon.html license is ok.
It’s hard to find free images that express something clearly and universally inside of 26x26 pixels… with an open license, no attribution*, and in a consistent 3D colorful style.
I went to https://www.iconfinder.com/ and looked for stuff with their most permissive license “Free For Commerical Use”, plus no attribution requirements. If that’s not good enough, we’ll have to hire someone.
I haven’t found ones for all categories, but here are some candidates for “Website”
Maybe a “?” icon would work, or a simple mask.
Maybe a single chemistry beaker.
- I say “no attribution” because I don’t think we want a paragraph of author attribution, expressed consent, website links, and GPL notices for each 26x26 icon we use. However, this does remove many candidates.