Unless the images were taken from very specific locations on the internet, like from OGA where the content is specifically licensed to be reused, reusing those images without permission is violating a copyright of some kind. Even when you change the image, or "make it your own" it is likely infringing on a copyright, even if the copyright is implicit. Giving the author credit does not protect you if they never gave permission for it's use in the first place.
Always make sure you know the license of an image (or have explicit permission from the image owner) and what you need to do to comply with that license.
Images here on OGA always indicate what licenses the images may be used under. Scraping Google image search is a great way to get lawyers angry at you.
If you have any questions about licensing or even other hypothetical scenarios, I'd love to help if I can. :)
The licensing issue remains unresolved. Although the internet archive shows a different license was used at one point, and that license is irrevokable, we still want permission from Harold Azmed to host it here under the "old" license. Anybody can use this under the old license, but OGA generally tries to adhere to an artists wishes regardless of being able to legally defy them. Harold Azmed has his songs listed as CC-NC. I would rather not remove these submissions, but I would feel a lot more comfortable if we had a clear blessing from the artist that he is ok with OGA hosting his work under an old license that don't match his current apparent preferences.
Regarding OGA's stance on licensing changes and artist's wishes vs license revokation: http://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-other "...If the attribution or license are incorrect, we would prefer to correct them rather than take the content down. However, we will remove all art at the author's request regardless of license, provided we can reasonably verify that you're the real author..."
http://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-changelicense "...We encourage you to respect the wishes of the artist if they decide to change the license on their work, however you are under absolutely no obligation to do so, because the license you obtained it under is irrevocable..."
@legopikmin: yes, based on the license selected, there are requirements to use this in a game. If you're not sure what a license requires of you, just click the license icon ( for example) to review the details of that license.
In this case, the license is CC BY-SA, so in summary, you're required to credit Skorpio in your game (a link back to this page is a good idea as well) indicate this asset is licensed CC BY-SA, and finally share any derivatives or new art you create based on this asset under the same license.
I think enemies (in more advanced levels) would be great, but I think they should be somewhat simple-acting enemies. Like a turrent that fires on anything in their line of sight, but the turret never moves around or turns to face a different direction. Having free-roaming enemies that can move around and slaughter you or your clones would be extremely difficult to manage; The player would be frantically trying to simultaneously flee and fight the enemy without screwing up their carefully-positioned arrangement of clones.
...Unless the game is turn-based or the enemies only move when you do (think Super-Hot) That could work.
The red layer seems to be just for demonstration of the transparency. Hiding the black background layer as well as "layer 1" under the bubble group is all it takes to replicate the preview image.
Yes, CC BY and CC-BY-SA already disallow DRM, but many artists have waived the anti-drm clause because, although it's a noble cause, restricting it often limits usability. So there is some mixed feelings about DRM restrictions.
Unless Against DRM license adds something fundamental not already present in CC BY licenses, I wonder how much use it would see on OGA.
TL;DR: Yes.
Unless the images were taken from very specific locations on the internet, like from OGA where the content is specifically licensed to be reused, reusing those images without permission is violating a copyright of some kind. Even when you change the image, or "make it your own" it is likely infringing on a copyright, even if the copyright is implicit. Giving the author credit does not protect you if they never gave permission for it's use in the first place.
Always make sure you know the license of an image (or have explicit permission from the image owner) and what you need to do to comply with that license.
Images here on OGA always indicate what licenses the images may be used under. Scraping Google image search is a great way to get lawyers angry at you.
If you have any questions about licensing or even other hypothetical scenarios, I'd love to help if I can. :)
The licensing issue remains unresolved. Although the internet archive shows a different license was used at one point, and that license is irrevokable, we still want permission from Harold Azmed to host it here under the "old" license. Anybody can use this under the old license, but OGA generally tries to adhere to an artists wishes regardless of being able to legally defy them. Harold Azmed has his songs listed as CC-NC. I would rather not remove these submissions, but I would feel a lot more comfortable if we had a clear blessing from the artist that he is ok with OGA hosting his work under an old license that don't match his current apparent preferences.
This applies to the other submissions from this artist as well: http://opengameart.org/content/palm-of-my-hand-intro, http://opengameart.org/content/palm-of-my-hand-flash-back, http://opengameart.org/content/churches-in-antioquia-intro
Regarding OGA's stance on licensing changes and artist's wishes vs license revokation:
http://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-other
"...If the attribution or license are incorrect, we would prefer to correct them rather than take the content down. However, we will remove all art at the author's request regardless of license, provided we can reasonably verify that you're the real author..."
http://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-changelicense
"...We encourage you to respect the wishes of the artist if they decide to change the license on their work, however you are under absolutely no obligation to do so, because the license you obtained it under is irrevocable..."
Welcome! I've used LÖVE some. :)
Excellent contribution. If you have any questions, just ask. Everyone's pretty willing to help out.
@Styno333: looks like the Voxel pack.
@legopikmin: yes, based on the license selected, there are requirements to use this in a game. If you're not sure what a license requires of you, just click the license icon (
for example) to review the details of that license.
In this case, the license is CC BY-SA, so in summary, you're required to credit Skorpio in your game (a link back to this page is a good idea as well) indicate this asset is licensed CC BY-SA, and finally share any derivatives or new art you create based on this asset under the same license.
Other assets on OGA may have other licenses, but none of the licenses forbid you from using them in a commercial game. See also http://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-proprietary.
Derivative works should be posted just like you did.
you're all good.
I think enemies (in more advanced levels) would be great, but I think they should be somewhat simple-acting enemies. Like a turrent that fires on anything in their line of sight, but the turret never moves around or turns to face a different direction. Having free-roaming enemies that can move around and slaughter you or your clones would be extremely difficult to manage; The player would be frantically trying to simultaneously flee and fight the enemy without screwing up their carefully-positioned arrangement of clones.
...Unless the game is turn-based or the enemies only move when you do (think Super-Hot) That could work.
^that, also.
The red layer seems to be just for demonstration of the transparency. Hiding the black background layer as well as "layer 1" under the bubble group is all it takes to replicate the preview image.
Yes, CC BY and CC-BY-SA already disallow DRM, but many artists have waived the anti-drm clause because, although it's a noble cause, restricting it often limits usability. So there is some mixed feelings about DRM restrictions.
Unless Against DRM license adds something fundamental not already present in CC BY licenses, I wonder how much use it would see on OGA.
Pages