-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 146
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Mention that all SVG files are under the SIL OFL license #62
Comments
Hello Sorry for the late reply and thank you for your message and question. It's actually a good question and I'm not 100% sure on the answer. As you maybe know, Fork Awesome is a fork of Font Awesome 4.7. And Font Awesome 4.7 is distributed with 3 licenses that we have kept intact:
The thing we did is extract the SVG icons from the font into individual files. So since the font was released under a SIL OFL 1.1 license, I'm guessing the resulting SVG icons must be kept under that license. (MIT is for the code only) Now, point 5 of the SIL license says this:
The question is: are the individual SVG icons considered a part of the original in font, and if such, they should be kept under the SIL OFL 1.1 license. Or are they considered documents created using the font software and thus could be licensed in any way we like. I tend to lean on the former, keeping the SIL license. But if you prefer the latter, consider the designs then under the documentation license, CC BY 3.0. |
Thanks, I want to integrate the SVGs directly into a website instead of using the font, so SIL OFL 1.1 should be the best one for me anyway! 👍 |
I would likely redistribute glyphs as ofl, yes |
@davelab6 Thx for the input. I'll add this to the documentation to clarify. |
Hi,
I prefer to use the SVG versions of the icons supplied in /src/icons/svg. I'm just not sure which license applies to them. The website footer states "Code is licensed under MIT License" but the README states that only "Fork Awesome CSS, LESS, and Sass files are licensed under the MIT License". Could you please clarify this? Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: