Does using CC-BY-SA art require that an entire project be released as open source?
In brief: No, but it may or may not require that the whole project be released as CC-BY-SA.
Due to legal ambiguities about what cosntitutes a "work" of art and what constitutes a "derivative work", it has not (to our knowledge at the time this FAQ question was written) been officially established whther CC-BY-SA's share-alike requirement is triggered for the entire game project.
For artists, we recommend against depending on this license to prevent your work from being used in closed-source projects. However, interpretation of the license and enforcement of your copyright is up to you, so you can certainly attempt to enforce a broad interpretation of the license if you choose to do so -- you just may end up losing in court.
For developers, we recommend against using CC-BY-SA works in proprietary projects without first getting explicit permission from the author. This is both to say safe from legal threats and just as a matter of respect for the wishes of the artist.
Note that OpenGameArt.org can not enforce copyright on other artists' behalf, nor can we be held responsible if you are found to be in violation of a license. The licensing discussion in this FAQ is for informational purposes only. It was not written or reviewed by a lawyer, and is not legal advice.
I think I'm probably going to just stick with OGA-BY as the name, then. Most of the other names have issues or are kind of awkward, or both.
I'll be setting it up this week along with a faq update about licensing stuff.
Note that I won't be giving OGA-BY any sort of preferential placement on the list of licenses; it'll be right after CC-BY, but before CC0. I'll also make it clear in the FAQ that it's just available as a choice because a lot of people asked for it, and that OGA's positioning on licenses will always be that we have no preference.
@pennomi: Honestly, I really only thought of that stuff because I decided to reconsider the idea of a rider, and then started to think about how I might go about implementing it. :)
Can I distribute my project on the Apple App Store, or other distribution platforms that impose mandatory technical measures (DRM) to prevent redistribution?
Generally no, unless the art you're using is licensed CC0 or OGA-BY (note: I believe it's time to add the new license along with the changes to the FAQ. It's clearly needed). CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, LGPLv3 and GPLv3 all have clauses that explicitly prevent technical measures (DRM) that prevent redistribution of the work in question. In addition, the Apple App Store terms of service conflict with the terms of the GPL, rendering the GPLv2 and LGPLv2 also incompatible with the app store.
The restriction on DRM in CC-BY was relatively unknown until recently, and has come as a surprise to many artists on OGA. If you want to release a game on the App Store (or some other distribution platform with mandatory DRM), you can contact the artist directly and get their explicit permission. Permission from the author of a work is in itself a license, and can override any other restrictions the license may place on redistribution.
Does using CC-BY-SA art require that an entire project be released as open source?
In brief: we don't know.
Due to legal ambiguities about what cosntitutes a "work" of art and what constitutes a "derivative work", it has not (to our knowledge at the time this FAQ question was written) been officially established whther CC-BY-SA requires the entirity of a game to be released as open source.
For artists, we recommend against depending on this license to prevent your work from being used in closed-source projects. However, interpretation of the license and enforcement of your copyright is up to you, so you can certainly attempt to enforce a broad interpretation of the license if you choose to do so -- you just may end up losing in court.
For developers, we recommend against using CC-BY-SA works in closed source projects without first getting explicit permission from the author. This is both to say safe from legal threats and just as a matter of respect for the wishes of the artist.
Note that OpenGameArt.org can not enforce copyright on other artists' behalf, nor can we be held responsible if you are found to be in violation of a license. The licensing discussion in this FAQ is for informational purposes only. It was not written or reviewed by a lawyer, and is not legal advice.
What do the licenses mean? I'm a commercial (closed-source) game developer. Can I use this art?
It depends on the license(s) the art is released under. Technicallyall of the art on this site is legal for use in commercial projects -- however, some of the licenses require you to distribute the source code of your entire project for free, and allow others to distribute the source for free as well. Here is a quick overview of the licenses and what they mean for commercial, closed-source developers. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. Read the licenses carefully and consult your legal department before including any of this art in non-open-source or commercial software.
This license requires you to release the any modifications to the art under the same license or one with similar terms, such as the GNU GPL. If you're trying to sell a game, this is probably something you want to avoid, as you may or may not be required to redistribute your entire game under the same license. If you want to use CC-BY-SA licensed art in a closed source project, you are advised to contact the artist first. Using art under this license may prevent you from being able to distribute your game on certain platforms, such as the Apple App Store. See [link to new question] for more details.
This license requires you to attribute the author of the content in the way that they specify. Provided the author is properly credited, it is generally safe to use this content in a commercial work. Using art under this license may prevent you from being able to distribute your game on certain platforms, such as the Apple App Store. See [link to new question] for more details.
This license, like Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 above, requires you to release modifications to the art under the same license. Furthermore, it has certain restrictions guaranteeing the user freedom from DRM. It is possible that you may be required to redistribute your entire project under this license, so if you want to use GPLed art in a closed source project, we strongly recommend contacting the artist for clarification. Using art under this license may prevent you from being able to distribute your game on certain platforms, such as the Apple App Store. See [link to new question] for more details.
This license, like Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 above, requires you to release modifications to the art under the same license. Furthermore, it has certain restrictions guaranteeing the user freedom from DRM. Using art under this license may prevent you from being able to distribute your game on certain platforms, such as the Apple App Store. See [link to new question] for more details.
This license, like Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 above, requires you to release any modifications you make to the art under the same license. It is possible that you may be required to redistribute your entire project under this license, so if you want to use GPLed art in a closed source project, we strongly recommend contacting the artist for clarification. Using art under this license may prevent you from being able to distribute your game on certain platforms, such as the Apple App Store. See [link to new question] for more details.
This license, like Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 above, requires you to release any modifications you make to the art under the same license. It is generally safe for commercial games to use content released under this license, provided they distribute the art and any modifications to it for free. Using art under this license may prevent you from being able to distribute your game on certain platforms, such as the Apple App Store. See [link to new question] for more details.
This license is equivalent to the Public Domain. There are therefore no legal concerns with using it, and it is safe to use in any project.
Just to reiterate, these notes are based on my understanding of these licenses, and should be taken with a grain of salt. If you notice anything incorrect here, please contact me.
These licenses allow you to use the licensed content freely, but you must distribute any modifications you make to the licensed art. The GPL is a license that is intended for computer source code, and certain parts of the GPL (such as references to the source code of a work) have no legally consistent meaning with respect to art. The FSF has clarified that using art in a game does not trigger the GPL's linking requirement, which most likely means that using GPLed art in a game does not require that game to be free and open source.
These licenses allow you to use the licensed content freely, but you must distribute any modifications you make to the licensed art. In addition, it's possible that this restriction may or may not apply to your entire game, although this is legally ambiguous. See [link to new question] for details.
These licenses allow you to use the licensed content freely, provided that you distribute that content, and all modifications thereof, under the same license. The LGPL does not require you license the rest of the project in any particular way; hence, you can include LGPLed content in commercial and closed-source projects without having to release them as Open Source. Like the GPL, the LGPL is a license that is intended for computer source code, and sections about source code in the LGPL has no legally consistent meaning with respect to art.
This license allows you to use the licensed content in any way, provided you attribute the author in the way specified by the license. You are not required to share modifications you make.
This license is functionally equivalent to the Public Domain, in that the author waives all rights to the published content. You may do anything with this content with no conditions, including re-licensing it any way you please.
If you don't mind, I'd like to use this thread to draft out changes to the faq. If you've got time, I'd appreciate your input. :)
So, I see two offending questions, and I'll paste them both here (I think I'm probably going to need to update the notes on the GPL as well, since I'm pretty sure the some of the same caveats apply to it that apply to CC-BY-SA.
Explanation of the licenses allowed on OpenGameArt.org
These licenses allow you to use the licensed content freely, but you must distribute the entire work under a license that requires the content to be shared freely.
These licenses allow you to use the licensed content freely, provided that you distribute that content, and all modifications thereof, under the same license. The LGPL does not require you license the rest of the project in any particular way; hence, you can include LGPLed content in commercial and closed-source projects without having to release them as Open Source.
This license allows you to use the licensed content in any way, provided you attribute the author in the way specified by the license. You are not required to share modifications you make.
This license is functionally equivalent to the Public Domain, in that the author waives all rights to the published content. You may do anything with this content with no conditions, including re-licensing it any way you please.
What do the licenses mean? I'm a commercial (closed-source) game developer. Can I use this art?
It depends on the license(s) the art is released under. Technicallyall of the art on this site is legal for use in commercial projects -- however, some of the licenses require you to distribute the source code of your entire project for free, and allow others to distribute the source for free as well. Here is a quick overview of the licenses and what they mean for commercial, closed-source developers. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. Read the licenses carefully and consult your legal department before including any of this art in non-open-source or commercial software.
This license requires you to release the source your entire project under the same license or one with similar terms, such as the GNU GPL. If you're trying to sell a game, this is probably something you want to avoid, as you will be required to distribute the source code, and your users will be allowed to distribute it as well.
This license requires you to attribute the author of the content in the way that they specify. Provided the author is properly credited, it is generally safe to use this content in a commercial work.
This license, like Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 above, requires you to release your entire project under the same license. Furthermore, it has certain restrictions guaranteeing the user freedom from DRM. If you want to sell a game, you probably don't want to use content that's released under this license, as you will be required to distribute the source code, and your users will be allowed to distribute it as well.
This license requires you to make the source code available for that content only. You may use this content in a non-open-source project, provided that you distribute the source of the content as well as any modifications you make to it under the same license. It does not, however, require you to distribute your entire project under the GNU LGPL. It is generally safe for commercial games to use content released under this license, provided they distribute the content and any modifications to it for free.
This license, like Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 above, requires you to release your entire project under the same license. If you want to sell a game, you probably don't want to use content that's released under this license, as you will be required to distribute the source code, and your users will be allowed to distribute it as well.
This license requires you to make the source code available for that content only. You may use this content in a non-open-source project, provided that you distribute the source of the content as well as any modifications you make to it under the same license. It does not, however, require you to distribute your entire project under the GNU LGPL. It is generally safe for commercial games to use content released under this license, provided they distribute the content and any modifications to it for free.
This license is equivalent to the Public Domain. There are therefore no legal concerns with using it, and it is safe to use in any project.
Just to reiterate, these notes are based on my understanding of these licenses, and should be taken with a grain of salt. If you notice anything incorrect here, please contact me.
Regarding why I'm not going to go with a waiver: mostly, it would add some confusion to the form as well as forcing an extra click.
The waiver really only reasonably applies to CC-BY (adding a similar provision to CC-BY-SA is a lot more complicated, because then you have to get into parallel distribution and such, and I'm not comfortable with trying to write licensing to do that). So if there were a waiver, there would need to be a special checkbox on the form just for if someone clicked on CC-BY, which adds to the complexity of the form from a technical standpoint, and also would make my life hell in terms of getting searching to work reasonably.
Think of it this way: If you're a developer wanting to make a game for the iphone store, you'll want to search for waived CC-BY content, and also all CC0 content. However, CC0 content won't have the waiver because it doesn't require one, so if I force the developer to filter their art search on the waiver field, they've then eliminated a bunch of perfectly valid CC0 results, which means I'd have to write up a special, custom field for that purpose.
So, all other things being equal, a special waiver would make the site way harder for me to maintain, and also potentially more confusing and harder to use for people submitting and searching art. So to some extent, the decision just to create a new license is a practical one, because from my standpoint it's far, far cleaner and easier to do.
Does using CC-BY-SA art require that an entire project be released as open source?
In brief: No, but it may or may not require that the whole project be released as CC-BY-SA.
Due to legal ambiguities about what cosntitutes a "work" of art and what constitutes a "derivative work", it has not (to our knowledge at the time this FAQ question was written) been officially established whther CC-BY-SA's share-alike requirement is triggered for the entire game project.
For artists, we recommend against depending on this license to prevent your work from being used in closed-source projects. However, interpretation of the license and enforcement of your copyright is up to you, so you can certainly attempt to enforce a broad interpretation of the license if you choose to do so -- you just may end up losing in court.
For developers, we recommend against using CC-BY-SA works in proprietary projects without first getting explicit permission from the author. This is both to say safe from legal threats and just as a matter of respect for the wishes of the artist.
Note that OpenGameArt.org can not enforce copyright on other artists' behalf, nor can we be held responsible if you are found to be in violation of a license. The licensing discussion in this FAQ is for informational purposes only. It was not written or reviewed by a lawyer, and is not legal advice.
Ah, good point. I'll update the question in a little while and post a new one.
I think I'm probably going to just stick with OGA-BY as the name, then. Most of the other names have issues or are kind of awkward, or both.
I'll be setting it up this week along with a faq update about licensing stuff.
Note that I won't be giving OGA-BY any sort of preferential placement on the list of licenses; it'll be right after CC-BY, but before CC0. I'll also make it clear in the FAQ that it's just available as a choice because a lot of people asked for it, and that OGA's positioning on licenses will always be that we have no preference.
@pennomi: Honestly, I really only thought of that stuff because I decided to reconsider the idea of a rider, and then started to think about how I might go about implementing it. :)
Can I distribute my project on the Apple App Store, or other distribution platforms that impose mandatory technical measures (DRM) to prevent redistribution?
Generally no, unless the art you're using is licensed CC0 or OGA-BY (note: I believe it's time to add the new license along with the changes to the FAQ. It's clearly needed). CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, LGPLv3 and GPLv3 all have clauses that explicitly prevent technical measures (DRM) that prevent redistribution of the work in question. In addition, the Apple App Store terms of service conflict with the terms of the GPL, rendering the GPLv2 and LGPLv2 also incompatible with the app store.
The restriction on DRM in CC-BY was relatively unknown until recently, and has come as a surprise to many artists on OGA. If you want to release a game on the App Store (or some other distribution platform with mandatory DRM), you can contact the artist directly and get their explicit permission. Permission from the author of a work is in itself a license, and can override any other restrictions the license may place on redistribution.
Does using CC-BY-SA art require that an entire project be released as open source?
In brief: we don't know.
Due to legal ambiguities about what cosntitutes a "work" of art and what constitutes a "derivative work", it has not (to our knowledge at the time this FAQ question was written) been officially established whther CC-BY-SA requires the entirity of a game to be released as open source.
For artists, we recommend against depending on this license to prevent your work from being used in closed-source projects. However, interpretation of the license and enforcement of your copyright is up to you, so you can certainly attempt to enforce a broad interpretation of the license if you choose to do so -- you just may end up losing in court.
For developers, we recommend against using CC-BY-SA works in closed source projects without first getting explicit permission from the author. This is both to say safe from legal threats and just as a matter of respect for the wishes of the artist.
Note that OpenGameArt.org can not enforce copyright on other artists' behalf, nor can we be held responsible if you are found to be in violation of a license. The licensing discussion in this FAQ is for informational purposes only. It was not written or reviewed by a lawyer, and is not legal advice.
What do the licenses mean? I'm a commercial (closed-source) game developer. Can I use this art?
It depends on the license(s) the art is released under. Technicallyall of the art on this site is legal for use in commercial projects -- however, some of the licenses require you to distribute the source code of your entire project for free, and allow others to distribute the source for free as well. Here is a quick overview of the licenses and what they mean for commercial, closed-source developers. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. Read the licenses carefully and consult your legal department before including any of this art in non-open-source or commercial software.
Just to reiterate, these notes are based on my understanding of these licenses, and should be taken with a grain of salt. If you notice anything incorrect here, please contact me.
Explanation of the licenses allowed on OpenGameArt.org
(note: the formatting is broken at the moment. will fix later)
All good.
If you don't mind, I'd like to use this thread to draft out changes to the faq. If you've got time, I'd appreciate your input. :)
So, I see two offending questions, and I'll paste them both here (I think I'm probably going to need to update the notes on the GPL as well, since I'm pretty sure the some of the same caveats apply to it that apply to CC-BY-SA.
Explanation of the licenses allowed on OpenGameArt.org
What do the licenses mean? I'm a commercial (closed-source) game developer. Can I use this art?
It depends on the license(s) the art is released under. Technicallyall of the art on this site is legal for use in commercial projects -- however, some of the licenses require you to distribute the source code of your entire project for free, and allow others to distribute the source for free as well. Here is a quick overview of the licenses and what they mean for commercial, closed-source developers. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. Read the licenses carefully and consult your legal department before including any of this art in non-open-source or commercial software.
Just to reiterate, these notes are based on my understanding of these licenses, and should be taken with a grain of salt. If you notice anything incorrect here, please contact me.
Regarding why I'm not going to go with a waiver: mostly, it would add some confusion to the form as well as forcing an extra click.
The waiver really only reasonably applies to CC-BY (adding a similar provision to CC-BY-SA is a lot more complicated, because then you have to get into parallel distribution and such, and I'm not comfortable with trying to write licensing to do that). So if there were a waiver, there would need to be a special checkbox on the form just for if someone clicked on CC-BY, which adds to the complexity of the form from a technical standpoint, and also would make my life hell in terms of getting searching to work reasonably.
Think of it this way: If you're a developer wanting to make a game for the iphone store, you'll want to search for waived CC-BY content, and also all CC0 content. However, CC0 content won't have the waiver because it doesn't require one, so if I force the developer to filter their art search on the waiver field, they've then eliminated a bunch of perfectly valid CC0 results, which means I'd have to write up a special, custom field for that purpose.
So, all other things being equal, a special waiver would make the site way harder for me to maintain, and also potentially more confusing and harder to use for people submitting and searching art. So to some extent, the decision just to create a new license is a practical one, because from my standpoint it's far, far cleaner and easier to do.
Pages