| As someone with open projects on GitHub that may or may not be a future source of income (lol), specific and succinct language on the licensing is probably your best way to ensure adoption of your product. I just cannot be bothered to risk using an icon font in a GitHub repo only to have to bleach every trace of it, because I misunderstood the license or the author’s intent. To help remember just how the hell the most popular “free” font icons are licensed, I created a gist: https://gist.github.com/4443939. There is no way that overview looks simple to anyone. This is what I as a developer think about as the very first thing, when I see a collection of free-asterisk icons. The cognitive load of parsing the legalese, especially from the standpoint of someone with zero jurisprudence is a huge toll and reason for my personal bounce rate on similar products. Consider what the point of your free icons are (portfolio vs. seeing your icons everywhere), and how you wish to stand out (quality vs. licensing). They say cache invalidation and naming things are the hardest thing in programming, but licensing is definitely up there; at the very least, it is something most people in the field do not—but should—understand. +++ tl;dr: If you launch a set of free(*) icons, crystal-clear licensing should be at the top of your checklist. |