The git log should give attribution if needed, and the icons are under the MIT license explicitly (you can find that information in Haiku inc pages about the trademarks and graphics usage).
The MIT license is generic enough that it should work for icons, and if someone has a problem with it, they can always ask the icon author for different permissions.
I assume you ment commercial usage and not non-commercial.
In any case licensing while preventing commercial usage is a bit icky since the MIT license does not match that, and inclusion in Haiku then makes this a bit more difficult.
If I sell DVDs with Haiku preloaded, do i now need to remove those icons? Am I violating the haiku trademark now because I modified the image?
Edit: I do care about this in the context of this rEFInd theme because including rEFind (as a multi-os bootloader) has been proposed severall times, and we could do that, and could (but not have to) use this theme. So making it compatible would be nice. : )
The mirror on github does not include the actual IOM sources, only hvif exports additionally it would be nice to know which license specifically is intended.
This post says MIT. So go with MIT. Whatâs the problem, that there is further discussion by people disagreeing with the author about this choice of license (which, by the way, is the same used by other Haiku icons)?
As far as I know, this is how these icons were originally distributed, for most of them I doubt the IOM source exists anywhere. But that only means the name of paths, shapes and colors are lost, and these are relatively easy to rename if you really need to.
I set up a repo with all the icons I did for Haiku, as you can see, I released them as MIT
And there is a showcase too, perhaps not optimized , especially for mobile browsers, due to my very limited skills in web development https://zumikkebe.github.io/zumi-haiku