$12256 / $11500
Hello everybody. I would like some help in understanding the logic behind the objects available here on the site where some artists make their projects available under CC0 license but prevent the objects from being resold. As far as I know, CC0 is a public domain license where whoever made it available under these terms has waived all copyrights to that work.
Some time ago I downloaded a content pack here on the site, made some changes and made it available on my site for free. But as I made several improvements to the files I intended to commercialize the objects in the future. I accessed the creator's website and there I came across the following message in its objects:
CAN I RESELL THE ASSETS IN A MARKETPLACE?
No, you can't do that
I contacted the breeder but so far I have had no response. I could be wrong, but I don't know if there is any logic in making your works available under a CC0 license and preventing people from reselling the objects that you gave up copyright.
Content pack in question:
https://opengameart.org/content/lowpoly-crystals-pack
Thanks!
This website's content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
The assets here on OGA that indicate a CC0 license do not forbid reselling. You should probably make contributions to add value if you plan to resell assets found here though. Just scraping the site to flip free assets for a quick buck is pretty rude, but it doesn't sound like that's your plan.
If the submitter stated the assets on their website cannot be resold, then the assets on their website are NOT cc0 licensed. They may be a separate "premium" version of the assets found here... Or the submitter may simply be mistaken about CC0. If resale is forbidden, then it isn't actually a CC0 license. Assets found on OGA should not be treated as the same as assets that look similar elsewhere. That author's assets on OGA are CC0, regardless of what other sites say about separate copies hosted elsewhere.
--Medicine StormI think the same way. The creator must not be aware of what a Public Domain license really is because on his website it is also explicit that this license is.
The files have been corrected, textured and tweaked to what I want. I intend to sell as part of a project, not the files that were downloaded, but my fully customized version.
Your plan sounds perfectly fine to me. Honestly, you can't be responsible for someone else's misunderstand about licenses, but it's also a good idea to have good relationships with your artists, even if you are well within your rights to do something they may not like. Hopefully you will hear back from this author soon and they'll agree that selling your project containing their derived assets is fine with them.
--Medicine StormThe creator has not yet manifested in my question. It's very frustrating, I'm losing sales on the project I've had so much work to do because someone doesn't understand the distribution rules. The company which is negotiating the project has suspended the purchase until I have a clear answer about it. =\
Don't count on a prompt response, even on response at all. The authors don't owe you support. They've clearly stated the license as CC0 both here and on their website. It was 1.5 years ago, the latest tweet from them was 1.5 years ago, maybe they don't walk among the living anymore (it's a fun time to live in, COVID included). Don't put your hopes and welfare on somebody's response to an e-mail. Choose either to trust, to wait, or to give up on these assets if you don't trust them for some reason.
It makes sense. I think I have no choice but to recreate all the objects myself. This is a point that should be reviewed on sites that make content available under a CC0 license. I'm pretty sure I won't be infringing any copyright if the original creator misunderstood what public domain means, unfortunately the company I'm selling my work to doesn't think the same way.
I found the profile of the creator on the cgtrader website, apparently he is active there. I got in touch about it and will come back here with an answer so that other users don't have to go through this kind of situation, at least not with this specific project.
IMO
If you downloaded the asset from here(OGA) and it was CC0, then you are only bound to CC0, no one can change that. As long as you signed in at the time of download it will give you a credits download file to prove it was CC0.
It's the responsability of the uploader to insure that they license their work correctly. If the uploading author is the real/genuine owner of the work and they have licensed it incorrectly, then that mistake is theirs not the end user. If its not a genuine owner then all bets are off and the asset will flagged until it can be sorted out.
The real/geniune owner is entitled to change the license at anytime should they realise thier mistake, but will have to concede that any of the asset downloaded before the change will remain on whatever license the agreed to previously.
That said, the Author/uploader should be respectfully treated, especially when allowing assets at no cost and if they made a msitake, end users should really uphold what the author wants, and work within the newer/updated license framework if its possible. If for any reason this makes it difficult because of the project logistics then perhaps some negotiation/leeway can be spoken about and communicated of the users intentions.
If you have treid to reach out and done what you can to ressolve your concerns and no one gets back to you, then id go with what you have, if its CC0, then so be it. You just need to make sure that the uploader is the geniune owner of uploaded works.
This is my opinion, not real legal advice :)
Chasersgaming | Support | Monstropolis |
I hope this works out for you, but most of the issues you're working through have little to do with OGA, so there is almost nothing we can advise you on more than what has already been said.
Thanks. But other users already don't have to go through this situation for the assets in question. I mean, you don't have to go through this situation either, but it sounds like your publisher(?) is convinced otherwise.
--Medicine StormThanks for the answers! I've already made my decision, if the original creator doesn't comment on it, I'll discard this project and create it myself. In the future I'll think twice before taking the risk of using objects with a CC0 license, because even though I'm absolutely sure I'm not doing anything wrong, I don't want to have to deal with this type of situation.
So there is a little misunderstanding here in that the licensee who posted the material is allowed to share their materials under any license they want, wherever they want and they do not have to use the same license all the time.
If they want to post material here under CC0 they can.
If they want to post materials on their own site with stricter licenses they can.
If they want to sell the material to an individual with a custom license they can.
That is all fine. You just have to make sure that YOU, as the user, are using it under the license that you access it under. The creater holds the copyright to the material and they can license it however they want to whomever they want and the license can be different.
I think the same way, but as I mentioned, it's not just up to me, because the company I'm going to sell the customized version to didn't accept the purchase unless the original creator gives explicit permission for use based on the license he made available here in the website. I'm pretty strict with that, even projects in the public domain. I like to have clear permission from the original creator.
The big problem here is that on the original creator's website he makes the same objects available under a CC0 license, but at the same time prevents the objects from being resold in any way.
Thanks for everyone's responses but I ended up giving up on these files and will create everything again myself. The company chose not to risk any kind of copyright issues, I don't blame them. It is an experience that I will take as a learning experience, if you want something well done, do it yourself.
I'm curious,...
If you can sell a game with those assets inside, does that count as reselling?
And if you sell those assets all by themselves, shouldn't that be the only reason to get called out for infringement?
Losely interpreted, yes it could, which is why none of the licenses on OGA allow for extra stipulations like "no reselling."
I understand what you're getting at, and its a good point, but... Nope, that isn't the only reason, because it isn't a reason at all. Because even selling the assets by themselves isn't infringement of the license. If the license says "no reselling" then it isn't a CC0 license, is it? It's like saying "Well, it's totally free, as long as you pay me $50.00" Well, then it isn't free, is it?
The assets here on OGA are openly licensed. If you get them from here, they can be resold, packaged with a game or otherwise. The terms of use on assets you get from somewhere else are irrelevant here. It doesn't matter if they appear to be the exact same assets as differently licensed assets elsewhere. If there are weird terms attached to assets on some other site, don't get them from that other site. Get them from here instead.
--Medicine Storm