GPL/LGPL-licensed images + iPhone development

Question

Since the majority of legal links / READMEs I've found when browsing icon sets refer me to the general GPL / LGPL (as opposed to a specialized version of some kind) when I'm looking at license restrictions, I'm having a terrible time trying to figure out what would constitute source code, linking, etc. when it comes to images and / or icons.

One specific example: under section 5 of the GPL, modifications must carry notices in the source code. . . how do I do that with an image? I guess I could try to find a few unused bits and encode my modifications in there (steganography, anyone?), but somehow that doesn't seem like what the license is shooting for.

There are also other sections in there where I have no idea how to begin to comply with.

Thus, I'm really confused. What exactly are the implications of using GPL and / or LGPL licensed images in something that isn't itself GPL'd? Specifically, I'd like to know what using GPL icons in an iPhone application might mean from a legal point of view.

It feels like I'm missing something obvious here; any enlightenment / references would be appreciated!

Answer 1

Disclaimer: You should consult an IP lawyer instead of seeking legal help on SO.

Disclaimer 2: I have strong dislike for GPL in particular, so you should take my words with a grain (or a bucket) of salt. I do however think that my concerns below are real and not just paranoid delusions.

With these two disclaimers in place, here's my take on this question.

As far as I know, GPL has not been tested yet in court with regards to non-source files, so it's all murky ground.

If you want to be on the safe side, I'd suggest you either release your code as GPL or you don't use GPLed assets in your code. (Or you could take the risk and hope that the asset copyright holder does not find out and decide to send you cease and desist letter. :-))

It's also possible that assets under GPL do not affect the licensing of a software module, since they are different classes of products. However, given the GPL wording and its strong focus on software, I'd be surprised if that holds true. Indeed, a quick search on the web for "GPL icons" reveals at least several comment threads (here's one example *) where people seem to have the same concern and to be interpreting the effect of using GPLed assets on the software the same way I am.

If the graphic assets you are looking at have LGPL-ed version, i would strongly advise you to use those. LGPL is better in this regards and would require you to ship (or offer easy access) the assets only, without affecting your software licensing.

• I am not affiliated with that particular site and I am not recommending its services or attempting to promote it. I merely want to point to the comments people left there. :-)

Answer 2

Taking the strictest interpretation of the GPL your work that incorporates the images would be considered a derivative work and therefore bound by the GPL requirements.

As for the LGPL the spirit behind the LGPL, as I understand it, is to allow you to use the licensed material in non-GPL code in such a way that the end user may replace the GPLed component with a modified version. (Thus they have the freedom to modify the LGPLed component)

That said, GPL/LGPL does not really make sense for an image but I would suspect the intent of the creator is to only allow their use in GPLed code.

You could alway ask the copyright owner what their intent is.