I did. Most of the levels seem to have an area I can't get past without some other ability, so I assume I don't have the ability yet, or I'm not aware of the full range of abilities. Regardless, it's fun. :)
Oh! I assumed it was a project that hadn't started yet. If you've got stuff to show, yeah SOYP is the best place.
However, any artwork featuring MLP characters would probably fall under Hasbro IP, so you could put that on the forum, but probably not submit them on the art submission pages.
@Courgarmint: In my opinion, CC-BY sounds ideal for your desires. Or possibly OGA-BY since it has no DRM restriction. I'd dual-license cc-by+oga-by, then everyone's happy.
Though I should say there is very low risk of someone flipping the license on one of your cc0 works and suing you for it. Besides the obvious "the law doesn't allow that" thing, I think it would be trivially easy to get the suit dismissed with nothing more than a motion of summary judgment showing you released it CC0 before they released it proprietary. All the judges I know would be like "WTF? Case dismissed." without you even being in a courtroom.
Edit: Also, as Clint Bellanger said, screenshots and the like are only a problem if they aren't fair use.
"So making a screenshot is a derivative art and the license applys? This is one of the most ridiculous things I heard so far..."
I agree.
"So suddenly a free open source game becomes much more restrictive than everything else? That did not work out as intended then."
I agree.
"Many of those open source licenses sound nice in theory, but in practice they sometimes become even worse than proprietary content, so where is the whole point then?"
I agree. Even in open source games I avoid using GPL or CC-BY-SA for exactly the reasons you stated. I wasn't saying this is what I would do. Only that it is something people might do.
The license doesn't always apply to the whole "work" even when art is mixed with art. If I have a cc-by asset AND a cc-by-sa assset, and I use them both in one project- depending on how the asset collections are arranged- that doesn't make both assets cc-by-sa. If I DERIVE new art from the cc-by-sa asset, yes; both the original and derived assets are cc-by-sa. I'm not trying to skirt the law or suggest you should disregard what the artist intended. I'm saying, legally, licenses can be kept separate by individual "collections" of assets, even within a single project.
If you mix art with code, yes that might make cc-by-sa apply to the output product. My scenario does not mix art with code. My hypothetical game engine remains separate from the art. One uses the other, but it does not derive one from the other. If all it takes to constitute a derivation is to have software display an asset in various ways, then whatever operating system and browser you use to display this website should be subject to CC-BY-SA. If you took a screenshot of my game, where cc-by-sa art was displayed along with other art, I suppose that screenshot might be considered a derivative. But I didn't make the screenshot. You did. I just made the game engine. That's where it gets sticky. There are a lot of fringe cases or weird scenarios where the answer changes.
There are existing cases where a cc-by-sa photo was used in a commercial photo album not licensed cc-by-sa. The courts considered the photo album to not be in violation of the photo's license. The main takeaway from this discussion (that's been going since 2012 at least) is that it is unclear.
Every situation is different and not subject to generalization. The only thing you can do to be sure is to consult a lawyer. That is exactly what I did. The lawyer specializing in intellectual property law advised me of roughly what I stated above: "art is not a derivative of game code, even if the game code uses the art". However, this was very specific to the way I used my hypothetical assets and it won't apply to everyone.
Or better yet, ask the artist(s). Clint intended his -SA art to be viral and inherited by the game engine. Out of respect for his wishes, I would license my entire game engine as -SA if I used any of his assets in my game... Or simply not use his assets.
I was not aware of flight. Should have guessed since the character is a pegasus. How do I do that?
I don't know what should be changed for the remake since I don't think I've ever played the original. Unless you mean Megaman was the original?
I did. Most of the levels seem to have an area I can't get past without some other ability, so I assume I don't have the ability yet, or I'm not aware of the full range of abilities. Regardless, it's fun. :)
Is accessing the GET variables through window.location.href an option?
Saw it. Looks good! :)
Bugbears are not trademarked. Parasprites: unknown. :/
Either way, you're allowed to talk about fan projects on the forum. Just be aware of the potential copyright issues. :)
Oh! I assumed it was a project that hadn't started yet. If you've got stuff to show, yeah SOYP is the best place.
However, any artwork featuring MLP characters would probably fall under Hasbro IP, so you could put that on the forum, but probably not submit them on the art submission pages.
Here's good. "Show Off Your Project" as well, even though there isn't much to show off yet. :)
@Courgarmint: In my opinion, CC-BY sounds ideal for your desires. Or possibly OGA-BY since it has no DRM restriction. I'd dual-license cc-by+oga-by, then everyone's happy.
Though I should say there is very low risk of someone flipping the license on one of your cc0 works and suing you for it. Besides the obvious "the law doesn't allow that" thing, I think it would be trivially easy to get the suit dismissed with nothing more than a motion of summary judgment showing you released it CC0 before they released it proprietary. All the judges I know would be like "WTF? Case dismissed." without you even being in a courtroom.
Edit: Also, as Clint Bellanger said, screenshots and the like are only a problem if they aren't fair use.
I agree.
I agree.
I agree. Even in open source games I avoid using GPL or CC-BY-SA for exactly the reasons you stated. I wasn't saying this is what I would do. Only that it is something people might do.
The license doesn't always apply to the whole "work" even when art is mixed with art. If I have a cc-by asset AND a cc-by-sa assset, and I use them both in one project- depending on how the asset collections are arranged- that doesn't make both assets cc-by-sa. If I DERIVE new art from the cc-by-sa asset, yes; both the original and derived assets are cc-by-sa. I'm not trying to skirt the law or suggest you should disregard what the artist intended. I'm saying, legally, licenses can be kept separate by individual "collections" of assets, even within a single project.
If you mix art with code, yes that might make cc-by-sa apply to the output product. My scenario does not mix art with code. My hypothetical game engine remains separate from the art. One uses the other, but it does not derive one from the other. If all it takes to constitute a derivation is to have software display an asset in various ways, then whatever operating system and browser you use to display this website should be subject to CC-BY-SA. If you took a screenshot of my game, where cc-by-sa art was displayed along with other art, I suppose that screenshot might be considered a derivative. But I didn't make the screenshot. You did. I just made the game engine. That's where it gets sticky. There are a lot of fringe cases or weird scenarios where the answer changes.
There are existing cases where a cc-by-sa photo was used in a commercial photo album not licensed cc-by-sa. The courts considered the photo album to not be in violation of the photo's license. The main takeaway from this discussion (that's been going since 2012 at least) is that it is unclear.
Every situation is different and not subject to generalization. The only thing you can do to be sure is to consult a lawyer. That is exactly what I did. The lawyer specializing in intellectual property law advised me of roughly what I stated above: "art is not a derivative of game code, even if the game code uses the art". However, this was very specific to the way I used my hypothetical assets and it won't apply to everyone.
Or better yet, ask the artist(s). Clint intended his -SA art to be viral and inherited by the game engine. Out of respect for his wishes, I would license my entire game engine as -SA if I used any of his assets in my game... Or simply not use his assets.
Pages