Skip to content

licensing: establish third-party asset attribution / NOTICE policy #136

Description

@yigitdot

Context

The Copilot review on #135 (discussion_r3282093382) flagged that inline SVG icon path data copied from third-party sets can carry licensing obligations:

  • Material Design Icons — Apache-2.0 (requires preserving attribution / NOTICE)
  • Simple Icons — CC0 / public domain (no obligation)

PR #135 resolved the immediate case in code: the mail glyph was redrawn from original coordinates (no Material path data), and the X / LinkedIn glyphs are from Simple Icons (CC0). The repo currently carries no third-party-licensed icon code.

The gap

The broader concern is not tracked anywhere. The repo has:

  • no LICENSE file and no license field in package.json
  • no NOTICE / THIRD-PARTY file
  • no documented convention for vetting third-party assets (icons, fonts, images, copied code snippets)

So the next contributor who pastes an icon path, a font, or a snippet from an Apache-2.0 / MIT source has nothing telling them an obligation may apply, and nowhere to record it.

Suggested scope

  • Decide whether to add a NOTICE / THIRD-PARTY-LICENSES file and what triggers an entry.
  • Document the rule where contributors read it (e.g. AGENTS.md): prefer original or CC0 assets; if a permissively-licensed asset is used, record source + license.
  • Optionally audit existing assets (fonts, public/ images, the wordmark SVGs) for the same question.

Surfaced by #135.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Type

    No type

    Fields

    Priority

    None yet

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions