Well, I'm definitely open to hear some guideline suggestions, but the current site attitude (not a formal policy) is that assets intended to provoke or arouse (a.k.a. "lewd") are not really what this site caters to. We do have some things like nude 3D models, but their intent is not for lewdness. Those submissions are primarily for anatomical reference and model bases.
Although OGA doesn't claim to be a 100% SFW site, we do try to keep things as SFW as possible. The controversy you reference was a whole different level. That was controversial primarily because it was associated with, and pushing the borders of, pornographic content featuring characters of questionable age. Was the content itself porn? Some would debate it. The associations and links that came with it were definitely trouble, though. As one of the other admins put it, "If it's remotely sexual and it involves drawn or 3D children, it definitely does not belong here." We won't be allowing that on OGA.
The site's founder, Bart, generally keeps a philosophy of not defining every minute policy with a formal rule, instead allowing situations to be judged on a case-by-case basis. I understand this may be frustrating since it doesn't give clear guidelines on what is and is not allowed, but that is probably intentional. This topic has no clearly defined line where one thing is fine and on the other side of the line it's outlawed. As a soft rule, though, I would reiterate that OGA's audience is generally not seeking lewd assets.
As for your involvement in that controversy, titleknown, don't worry about it. You were nither the submitter nor the protester of the content in question.
You are allowed to put your name on them. There just shouldn't be a bunch of duplicate posts all over the forum. If people aren't responding to the first one, it won't help to post a second one. That's why I gave the link to "how and when to write an art request". So you might have a better chance of getting a response.
Saying "it's got aliens and magic and a lot of detail" doesn't really qualify as telling us what the game is about, the art style, the dimensions needed, if it's open source, if there is any sort of compensation, or any indication of the level of effort required.
@Omerolvey: MindChamber isn't wrong; It's good to point out potential licensing issues, but you've gotta chill on the hostile accusitory tone. 99% of the time, it's a mistake and people didn't intend any malice. That aside, your followup response was entirely unneccessary since MindChambar had removed the sound components long before your reply. I appreciate your diligence, but I need you to find a friendlier way to point out potential problems.
Looking into it more, I have to say what you describe may be enough to be considered a derivative as weird as it is. It's a bit of a borderline case, but I've seen people get into an IP debate for making a 3D rendition of Crono from Chrono Trigger. Even though he was given a different name, it was clearly the character Crono, so it was arguably being considered fan art of the trademarked character. I actually wouldn't recommend openly licensing it, but I'll let you use your judgment.
Probably not. The question is: is this inspired or derived? Did you use any part of the original as a guide or base to create the 3D model? Beyond that, it can't be the same character; don't name it Horace, etc.
Understood. Your questions didn't seem rude to me. I just didn't understand what you were asking. You have clarified them, and I understand them now.
Because the terms in the -NC license are poorly defined or ambiguous, it is almost impossible to tell what would constitute "commercial use". For example: Let's say someone used art under the -NC license in their game, then posted that game here on OGA. (we don't really host games, but for the sake of this example, lets say OGA does.) Then, OGA decides to have advertisements to pay for hosting costs. Is that game breaking the law? OGA is technically making money by having that game hosted on the website. OGA takes donations currently. Is that breaking the law then? Since money is being made based on the content of the website, and that content is licensed Non-Commercial, is that going against the license? This is a rather extreme example, but not an unreasonable one because the -NC provisions don't really have a lot of limits outlined.
Ah, I see. No no no. I was not saying GPL code could not be compiled legally. I was saying it is possible to have a commercial game licensed GPL. It would be easy to steal the game, but it would still be stealing and illegal to do so. The fact that GPL does allow for commercial use is why the FSF and OSI consider GPL to be open and free, but do not consider -NC licenses to be open or free.
Well, I'm definitely open to hear some guideline suggestions, but the current site attitude (not a formal policy) is that assets intended to provoke or arouse (a.k.a. "lewd") are not really what this site caters to. We do have some things like nude 3D models, but their intent is not for lewdness. Those submissions are primarily for anatomical reference and model bases.
Although OGA doesn't claim to be a 100% SFW site, we do try to keep things as SFW as possible. The controversy you reference was a whole different level. That was controversial primarily because it was associated with, and pushing the borders of, pornographic content featuring characters of questionable age. Was the content itself porn? Some would debate it. The associations and links that came with it were definitely trouble, though. As one of the other admins put it, "If it's remotely sexual and it involves drawn or 3D children, it definitely does not belong here." We won't be allowing that on OGA.
The site's founder, Bart, generally keeps a philosophy of not defining every minute policy with a formal rule, instead allowing situations to be judged on a case-by-case basis. I understand this may be frustrating since it doesn't give clear guidelines on what is and is not allowed, but that is probably intentional. This topic has no clearly defined line where one thing is fine and on the other side of the line it's outlawed. As a soft rule, though, I would reiterate that OGA's audience is generally not seeking lewd assets.
As for your involvement in that controversy, titleknown, don't worry about it. You were nither the submitter nor the protester of the content in question.
Yes, but it might be more effective to just display what you've got here on the forum.
You are allowed to put your name on them. There just shouldn't be a bunch of duplicate posts all over the forum. If people aren't responding to the first one, it won't help to post a second one. That's why I gave the link to "how and when to write an art request". So you might have a better chance of getting a response.
Saying "it's got aliens and magic and a lot of detail" doesn't really qualify as telling us what the game is about, the art style, the dimensions needed, if it's open source, if there is any sort of compensation, or any indication of the level of effort required.
Is this a duplicate of https://opengameart.org/forumtopic/need-an-artist ?
This may be helpful: https://opengameart.org/forumtopic/how-and-when-to-write-a-good-art-request
Good luck with your project. :)
Thanks for pointing that out. I can't beleive I've never clicked Textures from the browse menu before.
...Fixed(?)
@Omerolvey: MindChamber isn't wrong; It's good to point out potential licensing issues, but you've gotta chill on the hostile accusitory tone. 99% of the time, it's a mistake and people didn't intend any malice. That aside, your followup response was entirely unneccessary since MindChambar had removed the sound components long before your reply. I appreciate your diligence, but I need you to find a friendlier way to point out potential problems.
"PD model"?
Looking into it more, I have to say what you describe may be enough to be considered a derivative as weird as it is. It's a bit of a borderline case, but I've seen people get into an IP debate for making a 3D rendition of Crono from Chrono Trigger. Even though he was given a different name, it was clearly the character Crono, so it was arguably being considered fan art of the trademarked character. I actually wouldn't recommend openly licensing it, but I'll let you use your judgment.
Probably not. The question is: is this inspired or derived? Did you use any part of the original as a guide or base to create the 3D model? Beyond that, it can't be the same character; don't name it Horace, etc.
Understood. Your questions didn't seem rude to me. I just didn't understand what you were asking. You have clarified them, and I understand them now.
Pages