The BipCot NoGov is not a license accepted on OpenGameArt. Would you be willing to go with the license you submitted it under instead? (CC-BY 3.0) Or indicate it is dual licensed with CC-BY 3.0 in the Copyright/Attribution instructions?
Those collections may continue to experience this issue because submissions with licensing issues continue to be added to them. Licensing issues are periodically removed from the archive when it is determined no legal solution will be forthcoming. This results in your collections containing references to removed content. I recommend avoiding the addition of assets marked with a licensing issue. When I can, I'll pre-emptively remove references in your collections before unpublishing the asset.
Make your own submission, AND indicate what was changed from the original in the description, and copy their attribution instructions into yours, adding your own name as well.
It's also a good idea to post a comment on their submission, indicating that you have made a derivative and include a link to your submission. :)
Usually when an artist says "link to the site" they mean either their own site or the specific page you found the asset on. Incidentally, this artist -- bart -- is also the owner of OpenGameArt.org, so either one works. :)
I'd personally recommend linking directly to this page, though. Makes it a lot easier for people to know exactly what work you're talking about when giving credit. A pretty good format guide for your credits screen is:
"[asset name]" ([asset link]) by [author]. [license(s)]
I'm pretty unclear on a lot of what is being said, but the FOSS status isn't one of those things. It seems obvious to me WithinAmnesia saying "It could be, but if that means tossing out viable engines, then no it won't be Open Source. To Be Determined."
Duion, are you saying if it isn't an Open Source project, you aren't interested in participating?
No no no! You have that backward: Heads I win, tails you lose. (you guys are in agreement: The Planets inspired Star Wars music. Star Wars music was inspired by The Planets)
I wasn't quoting me, I was quoting you. Your tree metaphor seemed like a search for human resources.
I wasn't really speaking of any specific project. I just figured there are so many existing projects out there that it may be effective to join one of those instead.
"So I figured to ask here to shake the community tree and see if any apples fall out; ring the bell and see if anyone is there behind the desk. *Proceeds to violently shake the tree* C'mon people to work with I am going nuts here!"
"I need people in a group ... *shakes the tree* Where are you hiding people!?!"
Shaking a tree to see who falls out; people who may want to join your project. I was saying 'No one is falling out to help you make your game, because they are busy looking for people to help them make their own game.'
Would you be willing to join a different project already under way?
The BipCot NoGov is not a license accepted on OpenGameArt. Would you be willing to go with the license you submitted it under instead? (CC-BY 3.0) Or indicate it is dual licensed with CC-BY 3.0 in the Copyright/Attribution instructions?
Those collections may continue to experience this issue because submissions with licensing issues continue to be added to them. Licensing issues are periodically removed from the archive when it is determined no legal solution will be forthcoming. This results in your collections containing references to removed content. I recommend avoiding the addition of assets marked with a licensing issue. When I can, I'll pre-emptively remove references in your collections before unpublishing the asset.
Fixed?
https://opengameart.org/forumtopic/important-forum-rules-clarification
Make your own submission, AND indicate what was changed from the original in the description, and copy their attribution instructions into yours, adding your own name as well.
It's also a good idea to post a comment on their submission, indicating that you have made a derivative and include a link to your submission. :)
Usually when an artist says "link to the site" they mean either their own site or the specific page you found the asset on. Incidentally, this artist -- bart -- is also the owner of OpenGameArt.org, so either one works. :)
I'd personally recommend linking directly to this page, though. Makes it a lot easier for people to know exactly what work you're talking about when giving credit. A pretty good format guide for your credits screen is:
which, in this case, would be:
I'm pretty unclear on a lot of what is being said, but the FOSS status isn't one of those things. It seems obvious to me WithinAmnesia saying "It could be, but if that means tossing out viable engines, then no it won't be Open Source. To Be Determined."
Duion, are you saying if it isn't an Open Source project, you aren't interested in participating?
No no no! You have that backward: Heads I win, tails you lose. (you guys are in agreement: The Planets inspired Star Wars music. Star Wars music was inspired by The Planets)
I wasn't quoting me, I was quoting you. Your tree metaphor seemed like a search for human resources.
I wasn't really speaking of any specific project. I just figured there are so many existing projects out there that it may be effective to join one of those instead.
In that case, your metaphors seem inconsistent:
Shaking a tree to see who falls out; people who may want to join your project. I was saying 'No one is falling out to help you make your game, because they are busy looking for people to help them make their own game.'
Would you be willing to join a different project already under way?
Pages