Kore2 Theme - Falkon Browser

Kore2 Theme

Source (link to git-repo or to original if based on someone elses unmodified work): Add the source-code for this project on opencode.net

0

Description:

This is a theme I designed and ZwS coded. It follows his non-vista menu design from the Black and White Menu but is more logically laid out following the design specs of the Gnome 3 desktop. The logout button does function, so does the User Information and Terminal Icons using GnoMenu 1.9. I recoded the XML slightly to get the functions working. The Theme skins were made from scratch but are based on the KDE Kore theme by Florian Egerer (code2) which can be found here: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/Kore+Suite?content=54701

Under Section 10 of the GPL this theme is a legal derivative and project.

Last changelog:

11 years ago

Terminal Icon opens gnome-terminal in GnoMenu 1.9
Logout Button functions in 1.9
User Info brings up gnome-about-me in 1.9
Fixed the Video Icon to Open ~/Videos directory

Version 4
Added a Favorites Button

Version 5
Changed User Info Icon to Text Editor (gedit) Icon due to redundancy with clicking User Image Frame also bringing up User Info.

Hard coded logout-dialog into XML code. Will no longer just logout.(TY dranockcir, should have thought of that myself.)

Version 6
Moved User Image Frame to top left hand corner.
Added Time Display
Added User Name Display
Added IP Address Display
Added Tux Logo where User Image Frame Used to be. Clicking on it brings up gnome-system-monitor.

TO DO. Graphics need to be cleaned up.

Added credits and made GPL disclaimer

16 comments
Comments/Ratings

Please login or register to add a comment or rating

thibaut28
11 years ago

Thanks for listening to me. I think we both learned something out of this.

technoshaun
11 years ago

I'm sorry but I WILL NOT back down on this. Original poster of the Kore Theme released all material, including art work under the GPL. This is the section that gives me the right to make derivative works of the Kore artwork:

10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.

Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.

An “entity transaction” is a transaction transferring control of an organization, or substantially all assets of one, or subdividing an organization, or merging organizations. If propagation of a covered work results from an entity transaction, each party to that transaction who receives a copy of the work also receives whatever licenses to the work the party's predecessor in interest had or could give under the previous paragraph, plus a right to possession of the Corresponding Source of the work from the predecessor in interest, if the predecessor has it or can get it with reasonable efforts.

You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it.

I have reported this GPL violation to the Free Software Foundation. Because the material is released under the GPL he CANNOT state that I cannot make modifications to his works because the GPL expressly gives me the right to do so.

thibaut28
11 years ago

By the 7th article of the GPL :

"“Additional permissions” are terms that supplement the terms of this License by making exceptions from one or more of its conditions. Additional permissions that are applicable to the entire Program shall be treated as though they were included in this License, to the extent that they are valid under applicable law. If additional permissions apply only to part of the Program, that part may be used separately under those permissions, but the entire Program remains governed by this License without regard to the additional permissions.

When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of it. (Additional permissions may be written to require their own removal in certain cases when you modify the work.) You may place additional permissions on material, added by you to a covered work, for which you have or can give appropriate copyright permission.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:"

by the b point of the same article, the author added as an additional term :

"YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO:

Publish parts of my skin without giving proper credit."

"b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal Notices displayed by works containing it"

Therefore if the original author asked for credits in the use of his artwork, you MUST credit him.

and by the c point, the author stated :

"YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO:

Publish parts of my skin, as a completely new project, EVEN if you give credit."

which if you look at the c point

"c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in reasonable ways as different from the original version;"

is a reasonnable additional term.

The original Kore is under GPL of course, but it has 2 additional terms you should take in account.

Look, I've got nothing against you personnaly or the GnoMenu project, it's just that in my opinion you should give credits wherever it's due.

technoshaun
11 years ago

Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.

Part 7 cannot supercede part 5 and he is NOT ALLOWED TO RESTRICT MY RIGHT TO MAKE A DERIVATIVE WORK. He can add further copyright compliant requirements but those cannot impede my rights to modify the work released under the GPL.

thibaut28
11 years ago

I agree, the 7 cannot supercede the 5th point. Actually 5th and 7th works together, as you can see by the b and c point of the 5th. The 4th may be superceded by the 5th (b point). Let's be clear, I never said that you couldn't release it under GPL. I said you should give credits to the original author. By the c point, the License (GPL) apply along with any applicable section 7 additional terms to the whole of the work. The License = The original GPL license + additional terms. The license remains GPL, so this IS NOT a violation of the GPL. The original kore work has been conveyed to you with 2 additional terms, respectively the b and c point of the 7th section. So yes you can release it under GPL (you even have to, or to any compatible license), but you have to comply with the original terms. You're talking about further copyright compliant requirements, actually the further applies to non permissive additional terms which are not declared in the GPL licence. The additional terms specified in the original artwork are supplements. They are valid and should be taken into account at the point 5. That's good that you're citing the 10th point but don't forget that the license is GPL + additional terms as stated before (see beginning of 7th point). Additional terms are included in the license. Therefore you HAVE to give credits.

Personnal question : What is so important about that work ? Why can't you create your own original one ? if you need help designing I'm sure lots of people are willing to help you, and the project, including me. Once again, it's not against you, but this is definitly not the good way of acting.

technoshaun
11 years ago

It wasn't the work so much as it was the GPL. As stated he cannot under section 5 impede my right to modify or make derivative works of the material released under the GPL and though his first requirement "YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO:
Publish parts of my skin without giving proper credit." is a valid addition to the GPL the second one "YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO: Publish parts of my skin, as a completely new project, EVEN if you give credit." is not. Once he released the material under the GPL he automatically gave everyone the right to do what he said they could not do. Section 5 implicitly states that I, or anyone else for that matter, has the right to do so. Section 5 is the very essence of what makes the GPL work. I maybe the original creator of a work, but when I use the GPL on it I give the right to others to expand, modify, make derivative works and distribute them freely. I am not allowed to place any restrictions on that right. Section 7 allows to make additional terms so long as those terms do not impede on section 5.

It wasn't a matter of artwork, it became a matter of defending my rights to do what I was doing under the rights given to me by the GPL.

thibaut28
11 years ago

I see the litigation is more about what the section 5 allows one to do or not.

"Section 5 implicitly states that I, or anyone else for that matter, has the right to do so"

Could you quote the explicit part of section 5 you're referring to ?

"Section 7 allows to make additional terms so long as those terms do not impede on section 5."

Can you quote for this one too ?

Why should anyone add any "valid" additional terms to the License if it can be superseded by the section 5, transforming therefore this more restrictive license into classical GPL ?

I think this should clear things up.

technoshaun
11 years ago

Sorry I meant section 10, wasn't fully awake this morning:

Paragraph 1 states what my rights are:

Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.

Paragraph 3 sentence one:

You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License.

In other words, yes he can require I give him credit for his original work, but he cannot restrict me from making any modifications to, or derivative works from.

thibaut28
11 years ago

What about crediting code2's original artwork ? http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/Kore+Suite?content=54701
You should really have a look at its licence agreements :

"YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO:

Publish parts of my skin without giving proper credit.
Publish parts of my skin, as a completely new project, EVEN if you give credit."

Just to let you know...

Whise
11 years ago

thanks for bringing this to our atention , we thought kore was an original based work ,kore will be removed from gnomenu themes

thibaut28
11 years ago

I absolutly don't think removing this theme would be a good idea. Think about people who use it. In my opinion, it's more important for people to know where the original work comes from. That's what was done here for kimmik's port of kore from domino to GTK http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Kore-Gnome?content=55747

technoshaun
11 years ago

First off the Kore and Kore2 GnoMenu themes were made from scratch for the GnoMenu project. They were not copied or pasted from any of your works they just followed your base design.

Secondly, your original works are under GPL license which means I am ALLOWED to modify them under the conditions of that license. Since that is the case you CANNOT stipulate otherwise. If you refuse to follow the terms of the GPL then you are in violation of said license.

eitreach
11 years ago

Are all the elements really necessary?

I don't really see the use for showing one's IP, a clock and so forth in a menu. It doesn't add much function - mostly just clutter, I think.

I suppose that's why I'm always reverting back to Gnome's menu line. :) Different strokes, etc..

technoshaun
11 years ago

Kore2 is a designed mostly to show what Gnomenu is capable of. The whole menu is a way to help themers look at the XML code and and see how it works with labels, icons and buttons. The only thing Kore2 doesn't show is tabs.

dspencer82
11 years ago

nice, like how it dosent look like vista

technoshaun
11 years ago

I love the design myself. This is the menu I use, not because I designed it but because it has proven, for me, the most functional and logical layout so far. When I show Linux off to New users they comment on how much better this menu is then XP's or Vista's.

11 years ago

Terminal Icon opens gnome-terminal in GnoMenu 1.9
Logout Button functions in 1.9
User Info brings up gnome-about-me in 1.9
Fixed the Video Icon to Open ~/Videos directory

Version 4
Added a Favorites Button

Version 5
Changed User Info Icon to Text Editor (gedit) Icon due to redundancy with clicking User Image Frame also bringing up User Info.

Hard coded logout-dialog into XML code. Will no longer just logout.(TY dranockcir, should have thought of that myself.)

Version 6
Moved User Image Frame to top left hand corner.
Added Time Display
Added User Name Display
Added IP Address Display
Added Tux Logo where User Image Frame Used to be. Clicking on it brings up gnome-system-monitor.

TO DO. Graphics need to be cleaned up.

Added credits and made GPL disclaimer

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10

Be the first to comment

File (click to download)	Version	Description	Downloads	Date	Filesize	DL	OCS-Install	MD5SUM