Primary tabs

Comments by User

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 21:10

Any of the LPC sprites are; they're all released under CC-BY and CC-BY-SA.


There's some confusion about the "SA" part about the license, but the license makes it pretty clear overall; if you make a derivative of an "SA" asset and want to release it online (or show it publicly) it must be released under the same SA license.

The confusion stems from what a derivative is, but I don't get why this is considered as such. I've read online a bunch and Will on here agrees with me; a derivative work only applies to directly extending or modifying the asset itself.


Putting an "SA" asset into a program, game, or any other kind of application does NOT make that game a derivative. You just need to specify that the assets are released under a different license as the source code.

And yes, the "BY" part of the CC forces you to attribute the original artist(s) in the way they specify. Oftentimes this also requires you to link back to a website; I think LPC requires you to link back to OpenGameArt.


If you use CC-BY assets in a commercial game and do not attribute them properly, it is illegal. If you use CC-SA assets in a commercial game and create derivative works of them but do not release them in the same license (if its CC-BY-SA for example, it must be released under CC-BY-SA), it is also illegal, regardless of whether its attributed or not.


I can provide an example of how attribution would look like if you want. Unfortunately, this whole dilemma has caused much confusion and has caused a ton of users not to use -SA assets at all. I originally got confused by this as well, but I'm not afraid of using -SA assets anymore.


Now, on the other hand, if the assets have things like -NC or -ND, that's a different story. I don't think OGA allows those types, though. -NC means non-commercial, so no commercial usage whatsoever. -ND means no derivatives. You can make a derivative if you want, but you can't release it publicly. Again, though, I don't think OGA has these licenses.

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 14:12

Can definitely use this for my snowfields and snowy village areas! ^^

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 12:48

^ I JUST noticed that myself. I've been playing around with this and its awesome, though I had to fix that qurik first.


The tileset is just recompiled LPC terrain, but what's awesome is that its got all the Terrains pre-configured. I didn't even know Terrain worked that way in Tiled and its awesome. This is the best pack of the LPC terrains I've seen so far because of the fact that its got a pre-configured Tiled tileset.

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 12:46

Oh, and on another note... Although I don't have much yet, and most of my assets will be modifications to LPC sprites (the only thing I have up was some LPC mods I made Guarav actually posted up here before I joined myself):



I waive the anti-drm clause in all assets I have legal right to on released under any form of Creative Commons license or GNU General Public License unless explicitly stated otherwise in the asset listing.


As others have stated, I hate DRM, but anything I'd make I'd want to be able to put on as many devices as I possibly could, and I'm sure other people would want to as well.

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 12:42

It seems pretty clear to me. IF you release an adaptation (or publicly create an adaption) it must be released under the same license.

An adaptation/derivative has nothing to do with things like including an asset inside an application, though. Its only a derivative if you directly modify or extend the asset.


Take the LPC character sprites for an example. If you create a new clothes or weapon addition, its a derivative of the LPC character spritesheet. If you take the LPC character sprites and add a new animation, such as running sprites (which I'm planning on doing eventually, or if I don't do it myself I'll commission someone to do it), that is also a derivative.


Creating a magic animation intended to be used with the LPC sprites would not be a derivative unless its directly based on the LPC sprites. A magic animation would be something that could be used for multiple things, and ultimately, although it could work with LPC it doesn't necessarily have to be.


Licensing was one of my major concerns and I did a ton of research last autumn about this subject. One thing that was made pretty clear everywhere I looked is that derivatives only count if modifying or extending an asset directly and it definitely does not extend to code (at least the SA license does not; I've heard that GPL might).

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 10:09

This is really cool, its got a kind of book texture to it. I've got an idea for a login feature in future games that this might be useful for.

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 08:50

Wait scroll HUB assets? That's awesome! That'd work excellently for my game UI which has some scroll aspects to it. Sweet I'll definitely take a look at this.

Saturday, March 22, 2014 - 08:47

This is great, excellent job! I think the "yellow" sand is ok in certain instances, but this looks more natural.


Friday, March 21, 2014 - 11:42

Thanks for the additional update. I'd rather not get too off-topic on this, but it is a nice tidbit. That's basically the conclusion I came to in my research, the only problem I had is the idea that some people might get upset because they didn't realize that the GPL licenses such as CC-BY-SA could be used in projects without restriction (except for perhaps in situations requiring assets to be re-licensed with DRM clauses when the asset license is anti-DRM), and the "ShareAlike" part only applies to making direct updates to the asset itself.


Whatever the case may be, I plan to make a lot of additions to existing things as is such as LPC character sprites for use in my own works, and naturally I'd be providing those derivatives up as well online so I'll be helping other people interested in using LPC sprites as is while still making assets I can use for my own plans.

Thursday, March 20, 2014 - 21:05

Oh, yeah, thanks Will for this update. I know it was directed at someone else, but this is exactly the problem I've been going over; I want to use assets for commercial games (not necessarily to sell directly though I may want to do that in certain cases), but the FAQ on OGA is a tad bit confusing and misleading.

I myself had come to the conclusion that derivatives only apply to making modifications of assets themselves, and I've seen this kind of thing in other projects where each license for different assets are specified directly and differently from the code. The code has its own license, but specific assets can be mentioned as being under a different license (I don't mind making my engine open source, but the game itself I'd want to restrict to personal usage for example).

The only problem at this point is iOS, and I may just stick with keeping it online. Pretty much anything else would be fine without it, though, such as Android.


Oh, and I have seen this Sara LPC sprite, it looks pretty good. I need to get back into helping fix up those hair assets as well. The hair positioning script sounds like its going good, but I'm going to write the recolor script (assuming its not done by the time I can get around to actually working on it :P).