(trademark search does not allow direct links unfortunately, but you can use the search linked above to find these results.)
I suggest we tell the user that we cannot allow the music unless it is named without trademark protected names in it, for the protection of game developers that want to use it, as using the track's name might be a problem.
(note that at time of writing, the linked song on OGA is also license-locked because the license choice by the user was under review (all licenses were selected)).
EDIT: I informed the user of the possible issue and that we would discuss it in this thread. They were so nice to make changes that remove this issue. I un-flagged the submissions.
I think a note encouraging the use of patent-free formats is reasonable.
Could you illustrate or describe how OGA could do this?
To my mind comes: one sentence explaining that OGA encourages FLAC and/or OGG Vorbis and why but I couldn't come up with an exact phrase yet.
PS: I think it's arrogant to claim that it's no biggie to just download and install a totally new piece of software (Audacity), soley for the purpose of converting an audio file into a useable format when at the same time nearly all other websites make an effort to provide formats that are instantly usable (.wav in .zip, .mp3). On the other hand I think there are good reasons to do so: 1. avoiding patent protected formats, 2. propagation of FLAC as an alternative to WAV and OGG Vorbis as an alternative to MP3. OGA could help users by having a phrase informing users about how to deal with OGG Vorbis and FLAC in case they haven't used them yet. We'd have to come up with a nice, concise phrase and the admins would have to decide whether it'd be a nice addition or whether it would be annoying clutter.
PPS: Check out the comments in the top 2 downloaded .flac files from freesound.org: 60009 and 60030 to see what kind of problems have with .flac format.
I would be for vorbis/flac and for selling .wav and .mp3 downloads to people who have the money to not spend the time to convert, but I can't ask OGA admins to go through the effort of actually implementing such a thing, both sofware and legal/business-side.
.rar archives once were allowed on OGA. Not any more. Not sure why but I'm glad it's the case.
Right now, art contributors can choose to promote free formats. I do that on freesound ( example: description of /171100/ ). Mostly as a reaction to about 12 comment complaints about not being able to open .flac during the last 2 years.
Do you have specific ideas for what OGA should do? A note in the upload form encouraging certain file formats? Auto conversion to vorbis/flac and deletion of mp3/wav originals?
This is so cool!
Sounds great! What did you create this for?
By the way, from metadata:
Artist=동영 김
Album=동영 김의 앨범
Hi,
The closest I know of on OGA:
http://opengameart.org/content/low-pixel-fighters-top-view (fitting tiles: http://opengameart.org/content/low-pixel-school-tileset-and-objects-etc-16x16px )
http://opengameart.org/content/8bit-style-music has "Bilbo" in its name. That one is protected many times (see http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=login&p_lang=english&p_d=trmk ) although I'm not sure it applies to song names. It definitely applies to game names:
(trademark search does not allow direct links unfortunately, but you can use the search linked above to find these results.)
I suggest we tell the user that we cannot allow the music unless it is named without trademark protected names in it, for the protection of game developers that want to use it, as using the track's name might be a problem.
(note that at time of writing, the linked song on OGA is also license-locked because the license choice by the user was under review (all licenses were selected)).
EDIT: I informed the user of the possible issue and that we would discuss it in this thread. They were so nice to make changes that remove this issue. I un-flagged the submissions.
I was assuming that riidom was joking. :)
Could you illustrate or describe how OGA could do this?
To my mind comes: one sentence explaining that OGA encourages FLAC and/or OGG Vorbis and why but I couldn't come up with an exact phrase yet.
PS: I think it's arrogant to claim that it's no biggie to just download and install a totally new piece of software (Audacity), soley for the purpose of converting an audio file into a useable format when at the same time nearly all other websites make an effort to provide formats that are instantly usable (.wav in .zip, .mp3). On the other hand I think there are good reasons to do so: 1. avoiding patent protected formats, 2. propagation of FLAC as an alternative to WAV and OGG Vorbis as an alternative to MP3. OGA could help users by having a phrase informing users about how to deal with OGG Vorbis and FLAC in case they haven't used them yet. We'd have to come up with a nice, concise phrase and the admins would have to decide whether it'd be a nice addition or whether it would be annoying clutter.
PPS: Check out the comments in the top 2 downloaded .flac files from freesound.org: 60009 and 60030 to see what kind of problems have with .flac format.
I would be for vorbis/flac and for selling .wav and .mp3 downloads to people who have the money to not spend the time to convert, but I can't ask OGA admins to go through the effort of actually implementing such a thing, both sofware and legal/business-side.
.rar archives once were allowed on OGA. Not any more. Not sure why but I'm glad it's the case.
Right now, art contributors can choose to promote free formats. I do that on freesound ( example: description of /171100/ ). Mostly as a reaction to about 12 comment complaints about not being able to open .flac during the last 2 years.
Do you have specific ideas for what OGA should do? A note in the upload form encouraging certain file formats? Auto conversion to vorbis/flac and deletion of mp3/wav originals?
Note: Ogg Vorbis is lossy.
Also this:
On FLAC and OGG Vorbis audio file formats.
How were the sounds made? (I'll split them into another pack for you)
Nice!
http://opengameart.org/content/casio "Casio" is a company that makes piano keyboards.
I flagged the submission for licensing issue.
I suppose the process should be:
1. flag licensing issue
2. contact submitter, asking to remove trademarks from description, title and file itself and ask them to contact you when they updated the submission
3. - submitter action required -
4. unflag licensing issue
?
EDIT: decided to delete the submission, as it seemed to be in a spam-like manner (unrelated website as author link).
Pages