phill source base of openlp does not state that in the license files in resources are Creative Commons.<br><br> Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Statement of usage is very small.<br><br>GNU Public License Library still has a requirement of copying include or basically 6 to 7 pages of legal filler. In fact I would have no problems with a license of
<div id="license_title">
<a target="_blank" id="license_title_link" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/">Creative Common Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported</a> With what I am doing. I am not selling the manual. <br>
</div> <br>Yes I also do want to give correct credit to the authors of the Images I used.<br>I had the felling I had seen most of them before.<br><br>I think we might have found a section of openlp that could be revised in licensing. Mostly adding to the Licensing file about the other licenses allowed on those files.<br><br>Just the way openlp source code currently is without asking if nuking of the Oxygen Icons rights in the source tree is intentional I don't know. Its something people need to be aware when importing duel license items into a GPL program that you can block the non GPL license. Remember the BSD guys getting upset with the Linux kernel importing stuff and not declaring it was BSD. Yes GPL is annoying viral at times.<br><br>Basically I need what license are those files.<br>