Looks excellent, but it looks like they never leave the ground, or to be more technical, a foot always touches the ground.

A run is a definition a sequence of leaps, even when in coding a sprite the state type or state physics is "on the ground"

It would be a brutal work for the coder to specify at every step land or air physics, so in running animations the frames where the char doesn't touch the ground should emulate gravity, then if the char is stopped in mid run by a punch or a boot or a wall, it is considered standing on ground and will change animation to the appropriate ground gethit action, altough in real world such a thing would make most people fall on ground on their back.

can I edit your images? I really like your character but I want to change some colors. i will give credits in my free games.thank you

I heard something about controversies with CC0 in some countries, and i would remind the advice of always keeping track of where the CC0 material was found even when the origin won't be mentioned in the credits, because some national authorities won't investigate by themselves in case of an accusation of copyright infringement.

S.I.A.E. in Italy, in case of suspected intellectual property theft might require the defendant to prove that the material was rightfully licensed CC0.

If I understand Puffolotti's concern, then the concern is addressed by the user of the asset keeping track of where they got their assets. Having a link to this page provides both the source of this derivative as well as the asset it was derived from. The complete provenance of the cc0 works is tracked here.

If Italian law places the burden of proof on the user of the asset, then I would recommend all Italians keep track of the sources of CC0 works they use. Nothing more needs to be done by the author. In fact, nothing more can be done by the author.

We do a pretty good job of verifying CC0 works soon after they're hosted here on OGA. We also provide download tracking and auto-attribution text files (go to your profile -> Downloads tab -> scroll to the bottom -> click "Download Credits File"). Beyond that there is no way to force a user to keep track of their downloaded assets.

Under U.S. law, if someone is incorrectly using a CC0 asset (ie. using an asset that is not CC0, but they're saying it is) the owner of the copyright must show that the infringing user is using it incorrectly. The only problem here is if Diana stole the assets and is lying about them being CC0. I don't think anyone here believes that is the case.

...Or have I misunderstood the issue?

Ok, good. In that case, I really don't think there is an issue. Even under Italian law, how would someone get in trouble? The government might say "prove this is CC0", even if they couldn't prove it, what happens then? they get sued? by who? As the author, you're the only one that could take them to court over it. Then again, I'm not very familiar with Italian law. They might make them take it down even without knowing the origin since it has no source, but again, that is the responsibility of the (italian) users, not the authors.

I still advise all users to track where they get assets, even though CC0 doesn't require it. But that's all we can do from this point; advise. :)

It is reliable, if you have it. It switches the burden of proof on the accuser.

Just like a new car with an old plate, if we imagine a bystander pointing to a cop: "that car is produced since 2016, but that plate number range was given around 2005 and 2007" the cop might ask for the vehicle registration. If the owner of the car has it, the moment he presents it to the cop, his problems with the issue are over.
In case of the CC0 license and a bogus accusation, the license switches the burden of proof on who made the accusation.

The advice of keeping the reference even if one does not intend to credit the author in the product corresponds to the advice of not throwing away the vehicle registration document when you buy a car, or not throwing away the license of an old videogame if you transfer it from Nintendo Wii to PC or PSP.

If you play a SNES videogame on a PSP, you don't have to wear the license or the original SNES cartridge on a necklace, but someone might require it.

Personally i find semantic credit-ing horrid, for who has a great idea in their head and doesn't want to divide their energy between design, production and semantic, but i'm illustrating an inevitable gap that the laws of some countries can't fill, without relinquish the tools to persecute real and serious intellectual property theft.

https://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-changelicense

No, you should not change the licenses on your CC0 works. It would be your choice to do so, but not recommended nor necessary.

Either my point about these things being the user's responsibility, not the author's was missed or I missed the point of discussing the efficacy and validity of the most widely used license on the site just because this submission happens use the license.

If any user is worried about the pitfalls of cc0 under their legal jurisdiction, good news: cc0 allows the user to change the license to whatever they want, including a more restrictive one that doesn't suffer from such pitfalls of fringe legal loopholes in the local legal code.

This seems to have gone far off the topic of this particular art submission. The licensing discussion would be better served moved to the forums instead.

Whatever the license, its is up to the USER to make sure they comply with said license restrictions and contribution notices(if any) when using an asset. If in certain country's there are other rules to note then that is on the USER to make sure they follow and comply with those rules as well. If prove is needed by that country then the USER must do all they can to keep a record/proof of what is needed to satisfy that governing body. It is NOT the responsibility of the author, that's all on the USER.

"The bottom line is that even if the work is under CC0 license, you still need to link back to the work right?"

NO, there is no obligation/requirement for the user to do anything with the asset, they can do what ever they like with it, they don't even have to credit you, they can even sell it if they want. Using a public domain license, you have giving up any rights or claims to that asset. If you want credit, or for users to link back to it, then you should find the license that suits your needs, which would be a 'CC-BY' license, here you can require additional attributions, which can include edits modifications etc.

if the asset has more than one license then the user can CHOOSE which license to use. if they choose CC0, then they needn't do anything, Choose CC-BY then they have to follow the rules of requirements stated in the license.

Don't be confused about 'Ownership' and 'Authorship'. They are not the same thing. You will ALWAYS be the author of something you created, it's how you license that creation that determines ownership.

I create assets and release them CC0, i will always be the author but i have waived any claims to ownership, i cannot claim i own them, or tell people what they can and can't do with them, i have giving up that right. People can claim they own them, but no one owns them, they are public domain, the public owns them.

anyways, feedback on your asset. It's good work well done.:)

"It would be a brutal work for the coder to specify at every step land or air physics"

Old console video games would use this method in code because it would save space on limited graphic banks. it's great you included both versions so users can choose. :)

haha, medicinestorm ninja'd me. :)

Yes i agree, if there are issues with licensing because of country specifics we should discuss them in another thread, they are not relevant to this asset.:)

Sorry for my horrid english, i feel as if i threw a stink bomb at a wedding party, now.

As short as possible:

This is a possible concern for the user, not a concern for the author.
Only in few countries.
Even there, the probability are astronomically low.

S.I.A.E. (Società ITALIANA autori editori) didn't say they don't recognize the CC0 license, they say that in case of controversy about CC0 assets they might not be able to retrieve the source of the assets. They have no authority outside Italy.

In short if someone falsely claims to be the author of an asset where isn't specified in the credits, S.I.A.E. won't roam the whole internet looking for the source of that very asset.