Yes. CC0 essentially makes the other licenses moot, but having multiple licenses listed (even ones that eclipse the others) makes assets easier to search. Someone searching for just GPL content for their GPL project may never see assets under just the CC0 license, even though CC0 can be adapted to GPL. This way, anyone searching for any one of the licenses will see this asset. The difference is minor, honestly, but there is nothing wrong with including all the licenses.
Would you be willing to consolidate your other submissions into a "low poly" set? It may make more sense to have 9+ objects of the same style in one place as opposed to 9+ separate pages with one object each.
Strictly speaking, these are not vector graphics. They're raster. That's fine, but if they're based on vector, do you have those vector files you'd be willing to share as well? It doubles their usefulness when people can use the .png or the .svg. Thanks again for sharing.
"... unauthorized use, reproduction, or distribution ... is strictly prohibited. All rights reserved."
Is in conflict with the licenses you've chosen. By sharing this art under the CC-BY or GPL license, you are giving everyone "the artist's permission" to redistribute and reproduce it, and you are authorizing people to use it in almost any way they want so long as they give you credit. They are not required to ask your permission because you are giving it by default. Sharing it here means all rights are NOT reserved. You are waiving most of them. Some rights reserved. Are you ok with that?
We need to understand how these were created and what resources were used to do so in order to be sure there is no licensing conflict.
Did you use the original undertail tileset as a reference?
And, if so, how so? Without this information I must mark these submissions as having potential licensing issues. If that information cannot be provided soon, I will have to remove the submissions.
Yes. CC0 essentially makes the other licenses moot, but having multiple licenses listed (even ones that eclipse the others) makes assets easier to search. Someone searching for just GPL content for their GPL project may never see assets under just the CC0 license, even though CC0 can be adapted to GPL. This way, anyone searching for any one of the licenses will see this asset. The difference is minor, honestly, but there is nothing wrong with including all the licenses.
@_Hello_: GIMP is able to use .psd files and it is free. https://www.gimp.org/downloads/
Would you be willing to consolidate your other submissions into a "low poly" set? It may make more sense to have 9+ objects of the same style in one place as opposed to 9+ separate pages with one object each.
Same. I've found Inkscape useful for vector art: https://inkscape.en.softonic.com/download
Great.
Strictly speaking, these are not vector graphics. They're raster. That's fine, but if they're based on vector, do you have those vector files you'd be willing to share as well? It doubles their usefulness when people can use the .png or the .svg. Thanks again for sharing.
Looks good. Thanks. Let us know if you have any questions about the licenses or their implications. We're always happy to help.
Cool!
However, the claim:Is in conflict with the licenses you've chosen. By sharing this art under the CC-BY or GPL license, you are giving everyone "the artist's permission" to redistribute and reproduce it, and you are authorizing people to use it in almost any way they want so long as they give you credit. They are not required to ask your permission because you are giving it by default. Sharing it here means all rights are NOT reserved. You are waiving most of them. Some rights reserved. Are you ok with that?EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
As sus as he is, he's right. Another banger.
Assets used for any Jetpack related work.
We need to understand how these were created and what resources were used to do so in order to be sure there is no licensing conflict.
Did you use the original undertail tileset as a reference?
And, if so, how so? Without this information I must mark these submissions as having potential licensing issues. If that information cannot be provided soon, I will have to remove the submissions.
Pages