@cemkalyoncu: long ago, we had one, two or three of the MIT/BSD/zLib licenses on OGA but they were removed, I assume because they were only used by two users at best. LGPL options also disappeared.
It would be not worth adding the MIT or BSD license, just to have one single user use it and then another coming along, asking for zlib licensing as an option.
If there was a permissive license that was specifically worded for all works of art, not only software, and it would have been approved by Debian, Definition of Free Cultural Works and ideally FSF, I would gladly discuss including it on OGA.
I am not a lawyer, I will not spend time writing or reviewing licenses.
I recommend you use CC0 or use CC-BY 3 and include the license you desire manually as a tag (and in the description text or as an attachement .txt).
Note: I am not an admin of OGA, I am merely a moderator and have a big mouth. ;)
Definitions of the boundaries of the public domain in relation to copyright, or intellectual property more generally, regard the public domain as a negative space, that is, it consists of works that are no longer in copyright term or were never protected by copyright law.
@cemkalyoncu it is correct that a game that accepts cc-by-sa 3 but not cc-by 3, would not be able to use cc-by 3 art without changing it. This is because 4. a. prohibits sublicensing of the original work.
The inability to re-license unchanged cc-by 3 art is a good thing (legally) in my eyes, because it (legally) prevents people from spreading cc-by 3 art, claiming that it is cc-by-nc-nd art.
When I create work under cc-by 3, I would be fine with the original being distributed in original form under cc-by-sa 3, however I would be offended, if it was distributed in original form under cc-by-nc or cc-by-nd (because I dispise these licenses).
(I am not sure that CC0 prohibits re-licensing the original work but I would be surprised.)
nubux: they are very good. The seem like healthy, happy, friendly children.
The children are in the game, however they do nothing but run around [video] (in a Fallout-2-style-manner :) ). I think they are waiting for thieir rat-infested school to be clear again. On the other hand: there are no teachers in there.
Hi, I like the game! The tiles are nice. I asked the author whether I can put them on opengameart :) If you hadn't given credit to him, I would not have found them.
Thanks for giving credit to the art from here and also letting us know! very kind!
Ooh, interesting! :)
Nice job!
What did you do to create this? I don't have a "make revision" button anywhere here..
@cemkalyoncu: long ago, we had one, two or three of the MIT/BSD/zLib licenses on OGA but they were removed, I assume because they were only used by two users at best. LGPL options also disappeared.
It would be not worth adding the MIT or BSD license, just to have one single user use it and then another coming along, asking for zlib licensing as an option.
If there was a permissive license that was specifically worded for all works of art, not only software, and it would have been approved by Debian, Definition of Free Cultural Works and ideally FSF, I would gladly discuss including it on OGA.
I am not a lawyer, I will not spend time writing or reviewing licenses.
I recommend you use CC0 or use CC-BY 3 and include the license you desire manually as a tag (and in the description text or as an attachement .txt).
Note: I am not an admin of OGA, I am merely a moderator and have a big mouth. ;)
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#Definition
My thinking is: if a work is not protected by copyright, a license cannot be applied to it, as it depends on copyright.
@cemkalyoncu it is correct that a game that accepts cc-by-sa 3 but not cc-by 3, would not be able to use cc-by 3 art without changing it. This is because 4. a. prohibits sublicensing of the original work.
The inability to re-license unchanged cc-by 3 art is a good thing (legally) in my eyes, because it (legally) prevents people from spreading cc-by 3 art, claiming that it is cc-by-nc-nd art.
When I create work under cc-by 3, I would be fine with the original being distributed in original form under cc-by-sa 3, however I would be offended, if it was distributed in original form under cc-by-nc or cc-by-nd (because I dispise these licenses).
(I am not sure that CC0 prohibits re-licensing the original work but I would be surprised.)
nubux: they are very good. The seem like healthy, happy, friendly children.
The children are in the game, however they do nothing but run around [video] (in a Fallout-2-style-manner :) ). I think they are waiting for thieir rat-infested school to be clear again. On the other hand: there are no teachers in there.
PS: license.txt
Hi, I like the game! The tiles are nice. I asked the author whether I can put them on opengameart :) If you hadn't given credit to him, I would not have found them.
Thanks for giving credit to the art from here and also letting us know! very kind!
Can you change the text to:
So it mentions the names of the artists and the license, please?
Ok, time for level 3..
@Mumu awesome! :D (and awesome use of the canons :) ).
I have my doubts that you may take Charles_Stewart_Parnell,_portrait_1885 or 16x16-dungeon-tiles and redistribute them without modifications under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA.
Thanks! I hope to hear about you posting your works here on your podcast! :D
(And I hope to see works from OpenGameArt in your games in the future!)
Pages