Okay, so it turns out that this was implemented a while ago, but in a way that was apparently buggy. We were actually exporting a comma-separated list of all preview images, but the standard only supports one, as far as I know. This is fixed, but it may only work for new links, and even then it might depend on whether or not Reddit is looking for them on OGA.
If it still doesn't work, we'll probably have to see if we can talk to Reddit, assuming we're big enough to get their attention.
So, change of direction here... I just talked to the guy who I had thought told me that CC-BY-SA might require things to be open source, and he doesn't think that he ever said that, so I may be misremembering. At any rate, he wrote an entry on the CC wiki about it, which interestingly enough reads an awful lot like Blender's original post:
So, it looks like the answer to "Does CC-BY-SA force entire games to be CC-BY-SA?" is just "no", because it's been clarified by the CC in a similar way that the FSF has clarified the GPL.
So, Blender: I stand corrected. It looks like you were right the whole time.
> Ah. "parallel distribution". So my example of obfuscated art alongside unobfuscated art would probably work since it is the same distribution(?)
I don't know for sure, but I would avoid it, since it's still a "technical measure" that restricts access. As a general rule, just ask the artist first. They may be fine with it, particularly if the art is being distributed in the archive in an un-obfuscated form.
It's a perfectly good question. Unfortunately, CC-BY-SA doesn't allow for parallel distribution. It would be nice if it did, but I'm told that is legally complicated (no idea why).
I think mdwh is right. There's nothing in CC-BY-SA that requires source distribution, as far as I can tell. The GPL has some special clauses about redistributing the "preferred form for modification" (essentially, it's got a lot of safeguards against people weaseling out of distributing real, editable source code), but CC-BY-SA doesn't have anything like that.
Icedman is actually using CC-BY on those random characters you linked, so while it's fine to use CC-BY-SA, you can also just use CC-BY.
Also, very nice work. :)
Okay, so it turns out that this was implemented a while ago, but in a way that was apparently buggy. We were actually exporting a comma-separated list of all preview images, but the standard only supports one, as far as I know. This is fixed, but it may only work for new links, and even then it might depend on whether or not Reddit is looking for them on OGA.
If it still doesn't work, we'll probably have to see if we can talk to Reddit, assuming we're big enough to get their attention.
Yeah, I'm not entirely certain how to go about it. I'll look into it. It may or may not require cooperation from Reddit.
I'd love to see people expand on these, for instance with a set of enemies or some more environments.
So, change of direction here... I just talked to the guy who I had thought told me that CC-BY-SA might require things to be open source, and he doesn't think that he ever said that, so I may be misremembering. At any rate, he wrote an entry on the CC wiki about it, which interestingly enough reads an awful lot like Blender's original post:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0/Games_3d_printing_and_functional_con...
So, it looks like the answer to "Does CC-BY-SA force entire games to be CC-BY-SA?" is just "no", because it's been clarified by the CC in a similar way that the FSF has clarified the GPL.
So, Blender: I stand corrected. It looks like you were right the whole time.
> Ah. "parallel distribution". So my example of obfuscated art alongside unobfuscated art would probably work since it is the same distribution(?)
I don't know for sure, but I would avoid it, since it's still a "technical measure" that restricts access. As a general rule, just ask the artist first. They may be fine with it, particularly if the art is being distributed in the archive in an un-obfuscated form.
It's a perfectly good question. Unfortunately, CC-BY-SA doesn't allow for parallel distribution. It would be nice if it did, but I'm told that is legally complicated (no idea why).
I'm not sure I like "simple" or "perfect" (I feel like "flawless" should be the best).
Maybe: flawed -> inferior -> average -> fine -> superior -> flawless
In case anyone misses it in the description, there's an extended version of this set here:
http://opengameart.org/content/extension-for-sci-fi-platformer-tiles-32x32
Kudos to rubberduck :)
I think mdwh is right. There's nothing in CC-BY-SA that requires source distribution, as far as I can tell. The GPL has some special clauses about redistributing the "preferred form for modification" (essentially, it's got a lot of safeguards against people weaseling out of distributing real, editable source code), but CC-BY-SA doesn't have anything like that.
Pages