@surt: I understand your point, and I suppose no matter how tactfully it's put, it'll always come off to some degree as 'asking for more', although that is sincerely not the intent. I do feel strongly that it is the artists decision how they want to distribute their work, and that folks shouldn't be pressured into one license or another. Like I say in the message text, folks are aces in my book no matter how they share their stuff.
However, I do think it's fair to say there is a lot of confusion around the anti-DRM clause of the CC-BY license. There are quite a few long forum discussions on the topic, and in particular http://opengameart.org/forumtopic/anti-drm-waiver springs to mind as a placewhere many long time/frequent OGA contributors have acknowledged that they didn't intend for their work to be restricted from use on DRM'd platforms when they chose the CC-BY license.
I say this not to be defensive, but just to explain that I am not trying to be a greedy bastard. I honestly think it's a pretty common thing for submitters to look at the licenses, click on CC-BY and think: 'you can use my work but you must credit me', yes that's what I want, without realizing that the 'technical measures' bit refers to using the work on DRM'd platforms (which make up the bulk of commercial platforms in today's world :(
I think where that leaves you is a place where artists submit work hoping to see it used in some fun projects, commercial or otherwise. But only less license savy or conscientious developers will use it, whereas the more learned/respectful developers will stear clear of it. Since (IMHO) respectful developers make it their business to be learned about proper licensing, this roughly translates to folks who are going to steal your work anyway do so and folks who want to use it legitamitely steer clear of because of the unintended anti-DRM stuff. I don't mean this a attack on CC-BY, I totally get the point of the 'technical measures' clause. I'm just saying this is what can happen if folks choose CC-BY w/o understanding the anti-DRM bit.
That said, you raise a good point, that's all alot of supposition on my part, and it's wrong to just assume people have made a choice in ignorance. And I suppose no matter how nicely it's stated, it's hard for a message like this not to come off as in some way muscling folks toward a particular license.
Like I say, that's why I'm struggling with this approach and why I posted this thread. I do think it's a genuine problem but I don't want to try and solve it in a way that bothers folks or damages the OGA community in anyway. Lord knows 'license wars' have killed many a good online community before and I'd hate for something like that befall OGA.
Finally let me say, you are definitely one of the last artists I'd want to scare off of OGA!
@eugeneloza: I think you are right, and this is probably a better approach, try to educate contributors on the way in, so they can select the license they intend upfront.
There is a breakdown of the license in the general site faq:
a) it is pitched a bit more toward developers/users than artists/submitters
b) it isn't linked anywhere from the art submission form (which has just links to the more detailed descriptions of each license)
c) it doesn't mention the OGA-BY license
d) it also doesn't mention the anti-DRM bits of CC-BY/SA licenses
In fact, the 'CC-BY' bit says 'Provided the author is properly credited, it is generally safe to use this content in a commercial work.' Which, if I didn't know better, I would assume meant CC-BY stuff was fine to use on DRM'd platforms. Actually, as a conscientous developer, this is what I assumed when I first discovered OGA based on that faq as well as the general license overview provided by the creative commons site. It wasn't until I saw a forum post on the topic that I understood that the 'technical measures' bit was referring to DRM. So maybe that's another reason I'm sensitive to this subject, I've made the same mistake just from the other side.
@Bart, any interest in updating the site FAQ to include some mention of the DRM stuff? What about a more submitter friendly version? (Something like 'Choosing the license that's right for you...') Or a link from the submission form to a general license faq?
@Saliv: Yeah you raise an interesting example with the case of derived work. Also, I totally get your point about not harassing folks. It's exactly what I'm concerned about, putting folks off from posting because everytime they do they get a lecture/nag about license stuff.
I guess the best I can do is try to scan the comments for the contributors other works to see if the issue has been raised to them already. I have found already that checking through an author's contributions is a good way to get a general sense of whether they may have selected CC-BY deliberately or if have they picked it not fully understanding the DRM part. I guess just because if you see someone post things under a variety of different licenses, you can inferer that they have some familiarity with the different licenses. On the other hand, like I say, sometimes you can see by the comments that the contributor is not interested in restricting their work from being used on DRM'd platforms.
Well, I guess I'm still undecided if I should proceed. Like I say, I don't want to make a pest of myself and OGA seems to have a really good culture going, I don't want to do anything to jeopordize that. On the otherhand, the DRM stuff in CC-BY is pretty widely misunderstood/missed. Argh! See I'm undecided ;)
Well, anyone have any better ideas on how to help folks better understand the disctinction between CC-BY and OGA-BY?
Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 18:46
thanks, glad that was a helpful comment, like I say, anxious about becoming the license police, especially since it's really your business how you license your stuff.
Anyway, this is a really nice trifecta of 8-bit sets you've contributed, can't wait to see what comes next! :)
Ok, I feel like I'm turning into the license police (this is not the first time I have posted a comment like this) but...
Since I see you are new to OGA, I wanted to mention that CC-BY license contains a clause prohibiting use on platforms that use DRM. Since most commercial platforms (IOS, Android, PS, XBox, Steam) have some form of DRM this does limit what folks can do with your art. Of course, if (like most folks ;) you hate DRM maybe that's what you want. :) At any rate, I thought I'd mention it, since I see you are new and it's something many, many people miss when reading over the CC-BY license. Bart has created an OGA-BY license, which contains an attribution requirement but no DRM restrictions which you can use if attribution is your main concern.
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to tell you how to license your work, that's totally your decision, and you are aces in my book just for sharing no matter what the license you choose. I just thought I'd mention this, as I see you are new and it something that has tripped up many folks in the past.
Thursday, March 12, 2015 - 01:52
thanks for sharing!
Looks great and as an Amiga kid I defitinetly recognize the Turrican influence!
oh, having downloaded the set, let me ask if the font in there is your creation also?
Another tip, just a thought really, is that you might want to drop a copy of the license and the attribution instructions in the zip file. Just as a sort of 'just in case you missed it' sort of thing.
these are great! and a very complete set! thanks for sharing!
> I'm still pretty new here and not really used to how the licensing works
Since you mention your new, wanted to mention that CC-BY license contains a clause prohibiting use on platforms that use DRM. Since most commercial platforms (IOS, Android, PS, XBox, Steam) have some form of DRM this does limit what folks can do with your art. Of course, if (like most folks ;) you hate DRM maybe that's what you want. :) At any rate, I thought I'd mention it, since you said you were new to licensing stuff and it's something many, many people miss when reading over the CC-BY license. Bart has created an OGA-BY license, which contains an attribution requirement but no DRM restrictions which you can use if attribution is your main concern.
Ok, let me repeat the final caveat, that I'm not trying to tell you how to license your work, that's totally your decision, and you are aces in my book just for sharing no matter what the license you choose. I just thought I'd mention this, as you said you were new to license stuff and it something that has tripped up many folks in the past.
@surt: I understand your point, and I suppose no matter how tactfully it's put, it'll always come off to some degree as 'asking for more', although that is sincerely not the intent. I do feel strongly that it is the artists decision how they want to distribute their work, and that folks shouldn't be pressured into one license or another. Like I say in the message text, folks are aces in my book no matter how they share their stuff.
However, I do think it's fair to say there is a lot of confusion around the anti-DRM clause of the CC-BY license. There are quite a few long forum discussions on the topic, and in particular http://opengameart.org/forumtopic/anti-drm-waiver springs to mind as a placewhere many long time/frequent OGA contributors have acknowledged that they didn't intend for their work to be restricted from use on DRM'd platforms when they chose the CC-BY license.
I say this not to be defensive, but just to explain that I am not trying to be a greedy bastard. I honestly think it's a pretty common thing for submitters to look at the licenses, click on CC-BY and think: 'you can use my work but you must credit me', yes that's what I want, without realizing that the 'technical measures' bit refers to using the work on DRM'd platforms (which make up the bulk of commercial platforms in today's world :(
I think where that leaves you is a place where artists submit work hoping to see it used in some fun projects, commercial or otherwise. But only less license savy or conscientious developers will use it, whereas the more learned/respectful developers will stear clear of it. Since (IMHO) respectful developers make it their business to be learned about proper licensing, this roughly translates to folks who are going to steal your work anyway do so and folks who want to use it legitamitely steer clear of because of the unintended anti-DRM stuff. I don't mean this a attack on CC-BY, I totally get the point of the 'technical measures' clause. I'm just saying this is what can happen if folks choose CC-BY w/o understanding the anti-DRM bit.
That said, you raise a good point, that's all alot of supposition on my part, and it's wrong to just assume people have made a choice in ignorance. And I suppose no matter how nicely it's stated, it's hard for a message like this not to come off as in some way muscling folks toward a particular license.
Like I say, that's why I'm struggling with this approach and why I posted this thread. I do think it's a genuine problem but I don't want to try and solve it in a way that bothers folks or damages the OGA community in anyway. Lord knows 'license wars' have killed many a good online community before and I'd hate for something like that befall OGA.
Finally let me say, you are definitely one of the last artists I'd want to scare off of OGA!
@eugeneloza: I think you are right, and this is probably a better approach, try to educate contributors on the way in, so they can select the license they intend upfront.
There is a breakdown of the license in the general site faq:
http://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-proprietary
But:
a) it is pitched a bit more toward developers/users than artists/submitters
b) it isn't linked anywhere from the art submission form (which has just links to the more detailed descriptions of each license)
c) it doesn't mention the OGA-BY license
d) it also doesn't mention the anti-DRM bits of CC-BY/SA licenses
In fact, the 'CC-BY' bit says 'Provided the author is properly credited, it is generally safe to use this content in a commercial work.' Which, if I didn't know better, I would assume meant CC-BY stuff was fine to use on DRM'd platforms. Actually, as a conscientous developer, this is what I assumed when I first discovered OGA based on that faq as well as the general license overview provided by the creative commons site. It wasn't until I saw a forum post on the topic that I understood that the 'technical measures' bit was referring to DRM. So maybe that's another reason I'm sensitive to this subject, I've made the same mistake just from the other side.
@Bart, any interest in updating the site FAQ to include some mention of the DRM stuff? What about a more submitter friendly version? (Something like 'Choosing the license that's right for you...') Or a link from the submission form to a general license faq?
thanks for the thoughts.
@Saliv: Yeah you raise an interesting example with the case of derived work. Also, I totally get your point about not harassing folks. It's exactly what I'm concerned about, putting folks off from posting because everytime they do they get a lecture/nag about license stuff.
I guess the best I can do is try to scan the comments for the contributors other works to see if the issue has been raised to them already. I have found already that checking through an author's contributions is a good way to get a general sense of whether they may have selected CC-BY deliberately or if have they picked it not fully understanding the DRM part. I guess just because if you see someone post things under a variety of different licenses, you can inferer that they have some familiarity with the different licenses. On the other hand, like I say, sometimes you can see by the comments that the contributor is not interested in restricting their work from being used on DRM'd platforms.
Well, I guess I'm still undecided if I should proceed. Like I say, I don't want to make a pest of myself and OGA seems to have a really good culture going, I don't want to do anything to jeopordize that. On the otherhand, the DRM stuff in CC-BY is pretty widely misunderstood/missed. Argh! See I'm undecided ;)
Well, anyone have any better ideas on how to help folks better understand the disctinction between CC-BY and OGA-BY?
thanks, glad that was a helpful comment, like I say, anxious about becoming the license police, especially since it's really your business how you license your stuff.
Anyway, this is a really nice trifecta of 8-bit sets you've contributed, can't wait to see what comes next! :)
@gnola14: thanks for putting this together!
As a shameless plug for 7soul, you can purchase his latest pack of 1400 icons along with a host of other good works here:
http://7soul.itch.io/
Another great set! Thanks for sharing!
Ok, I feel like I'm turning into the license police (this is not the first time I have posted a comment like this) but...
Since I see you are new to OGA, I wanted to mention that CC-BY license contains a clause prohibiting use on platforms that use DRM. Since most commercial platforms (IOS, Android, PS, XBox, Steam) have some form of DRM this does limit what folks can do with your art. Of course, if (like most folks ;) you hate DRM maybe that's what you want. :) At any rate, I thought I'd mention it, since I see you are new and it's something many, many people miss when reading over the CC-BY license. Bart has created an OGA-BY license, which contains an attribution requirement but no DRM restrictions which you can use if attribution is your main concern.
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to tell you how to license your work, that's totally your decision, and you are aces in my book just for sharing no matter what the license you choose. I just thought I'd mention this, as I see you are new and it something that has tripped up many folks in the past.
thanks for sharing!
Looks great and as an Amiga kid I defitinetly recognize the Turrican influence!
Call it: TurricaNES!
glad to help, and that's good news about the font, because it looks nice too!
oh, having downloaded the set, let me ask if the font in there is your creation also?
Another tip, just a thought really, is that you might want to drop a copy of the license and the attribution instructions in the zip file. Just as a sort of 'just in case you missed it' sort of thing.
these are great! and a very complete set! thanks for sharing!
> I'm still pretty new here and not really used to how the licensing works
Since you mention your new, wanted to mention that CC-BY license contains a clause prohibiting use on platforms that use DRM. Since most commercial platforms (IOS, Android, PS, XBox, Steam) have some form of DRM this does limit what folks can do with your art. Of course, if (like most folks ;) you hate DRM maybe that's what you want. :) At any rate, I thought I'd mention it, since you said you were new to licensing stuff and it's something many, many people miss when reading over the CC-BY license. Bart has created an OGA-BY license, which contains an attribution requirement but no DRM restrictions which you can use if attribution is your main concern.
Ok, let me repeat the final caveat, that I'm not trying to tell you how to license your work, that's totally your decision, and you are aces in my book just for sharing no matter what the license you choose. I just thought I'd mention this, as you said you were new to license stuff and it something that has tripped up many folks in the past.
this track rocks!
I love it!
Pages