You’re saying that if the creator of the sticker wanted to be recognized or was concerned about others making use of his design without his approval, he’d have signed it or added his username? That isn’t necessary, you still own the rights to a work you made even if you don’t sign it - including the right to give it away and allow free use, but that’s a right that needs to be exercised.
For example, Linux source code is free, for any use (as per the GPL). The name “Linux”, however, is a trademark, registered by Linus in the US and other places, and it’s usage is protected (the Linux foundation has a page about it).
I don’t think anyone’s gonna be mad about stickers, the point I was trying to make was about what FOSS means in the context of Linux and software in general, but also how it relates to other forms of intellectual property protection.
That’s unrelated to OPs point that because Linux is FOSS, so is the drawing. As an advocate for open source, I try to clear up this kind of confusion.
If the creator of this sticker was worried about posting their username, I’m sure they probably would have…
Sorry, I don’t understand what you mean.
You’re saying that if the creator of the sticker wanted to be recognized or was concerned about others making use of his design without his approval, he’d have signed it or added his username? That isn’t necessary, you still own the rights to a work you made even if you don’t sign it - including the right to give it away and allow free use, but that’s a right that needs to be exercised.
For example, Linux source code is free, for any use (as per the GPL). The name “Linux”, however, is a trademark, registered by Linus in the US and other places, and it’s usage is protected (the Linux foundation has a page about it).
I don’t think anyone’s gonna be mad about stickers, the point I was trying to make was about what FOSS means in the context of Linux and software in general, but also how it relates to other forms of intellectual property protection.