Alexander R. Pruss (ap85@georgetown.edu) wrote:

I was wondering under what circumstances images created with the Gimp need to be GPL'ed. Obviously, program output is not a derivative work. But images created with the Gimp might incorporate copyrighted elements such as brush shapes (there might be a single brush stroke from which the brush could be reconstructed), a texture, fill pattern, etc. Or what if I use a default set of parameters from Fractal Explorer to generate a fractal that is a prominent part of an image? (The latter is the question that interests me. I wish I knew what "source code" means in that context, too. The fractal params? The xcf file?)

Brush shapes, Patterns etc. are packaged with the Gimp for the sole purpose of being incorporated into other images. It is not intended to extend the GPL to images generated with the GIMP.

Maybe we should state this explicit in a readme, maybe even place the brushes/patterns etc. in the public domain explicitely.

So you can do with your images whatever you want. If there are facts that prohibit this for whatever reason (because of the GIMP distribution) we will eliminate this obstacle.

Bye, Simon

Hi,

"Alexander R. Pruss" writes:

I was wondering under what circumstances images created with the Gimp need to be GPL'ed.

Under no circumstances will the use of The GIMP or any of the data files that ship with The GIMP force any kind of license on the images you create with it. I am not a lawyer but this is the GIMP developers' point of view on this subject. We have always denied to include plug-ins that attempt to put restrictions on how they are being used. The GPL applies to the source code only.

Sven