Jon Philips of Creative Commons, #NewPalmyra, and OpenClipArt.org helped to define the Creative Commons licensing structure for art, etc.
Jon was one of the early supporters of this project in 2010, and he has offered us some valuable advice. He suggests strongly that we go with the CC-by-3.0 license.
OpenClipArt found that it was too complicated when users could choose which license was applicable for their work. This is because most users don’t understand the differences between licenses. They switched to allowing only artwork released into the public domain.
XML isn’t considered to be code, it is considered data.
SVG isn’t considered to be code, it is XML.
HPGL is considered to be “code-like”, and contains instructions for printers. The images produced by the printers control the licensing for the HPGL file. So copyright applies to HPGL unless the author/artist replaces it with a CC license or release to public usage.
PDF, PS, EPS are based on PostScript (a printer code language) and are considered to be a publishing format like a book. Copyright rules apply, unless the author/artist replaces it with a CC license or release to public usage.
PNG, JPG, etc aren’t code, their are raster digital images.
This is why Creative Commons licensing was created, to cover these digital products which aren’t exactly code, and don’t match completely with GPL, Apache, MIT, and other open source licenses.
The structure of Github is not so good for shared artwork with version control, SparkleShare is better.
Git is open source, Github itself is not, but this is fine. Also, private repos are allowed on Github. Only when your mark your repo as public does it become free of charge, and it becomes visible to the public. This says nothing about the licensing of your code. So if your code is on Github either as public or private repo, this doesn’t mean that your code is released under an open source license.
However, for our usage where we need simple sharing (not version control), a shared website where users upload and download files is preferable to Github. And a single license structure like CC-by-3.0 should apply to everything available on the site. Because downloads from the Valentina pattern share could contain XML, printer code, and raster image files.