So indicating (in the app) where the art can be accessed freely doesn't satisfy the anti-drm clause? I can't prevent the app store from DRMing the artwork, but I can provide an alterante avenue for the artwork to be obtained by anyone who wants it.
Kinda like saying "oh, it's DRMed here, sure. but right over here we un-DRMed it." If that isn't enough to satisfy the anti-drm clause, then does that mean I can't imbed pieces of the artwork in scripting data for quicker loading even though I also provide the same artwork un-obfuscated in the next folder over?
What version of GIMP are you using? Some of the layers I can see by themselves, but they don't seem to combine when I make them visible with other layers.
"I really don't see open licenses as a way to justify not asking for permission"
I don't remember when or where, but I'm pretty sure bart said one of the main points of how OGA is set up is so artists can release art without having to be constantly bugged by people asking them the same thing over and over: "Can I use your art for xyz?". In which case, open licenses here are very much intended to justify not asking for permission, no? ...assuming the person who would need permission is not violating any of the terms of the license.
I don't think people should avoid asking permission, especially when they are in doubt, but sometimes the point of the license is so people don't have to.
1.) This is awesome. Thanks!
2.) I need to visit Germany.
Ah. "parallel distribution". So my example of obfuscated art alongside unobfuscated art would probably work since it is the same distribution(?)
But the "see my website for artwork downloads!" example would clearly not work.
Thanks! That is excellent not-legal-advice.
If this is off-topic, just tell me to shut up:
So indicating (in the app) where the art can be accessed freely doesn't satisfy the anti-drm clause? I can't prevent the app store from DRMing the artwork, but I can provide an alterante avenue for the artwork to be obtained by anyone who wants it.
Kinda like saying "oh, it's DRMed here, sure. but right over here we un-DRMed it." If that isn't enough to satisfy the anti-drm clause, then does that mean I can't imbed pieces of the artwork in scripting data for quicker loading even though I also provide the same artwork un-obfuscated in the next folder over?
What version of GIMP are you using? Some of the layers I can see by themselves, but they don't seem to combine when I make them visible with other layers.
Lol! Well in that case, paper and skin should be the new standard of currency.
This is gold, yd.
Nice work! I used this in a quick currency demo I made.
Is there a frame of animation missing? It didn't quite look right until I added the attached frame.
Just noticed this doesn't include Henk Brouwer's "Xerathul's Revenge" tiles. Are they in a different collection?
EDIT: never mind. Just relized they may be licensed differently. I'll ask the artist about licensing.
I don't remember when or where, but I'm pretty sure bart said one of the main points of how OGA is set up is so artists can release art without having to be constantly bugged by people asking them the same thing over and over: "Can I use your art for xyz?". In which case, open licenses here are very much intended to justify not asking for permission, no? ...assuming the person who would need permission is not violating any of the terms of the license.
I don't think people should avoid asking permission, especially when they are in doubt, but sometimes the point of the license is so people don't have to.
This color vs. colorless theme reminds me of H.P. Lovecraft's "The Color Out of Space" story. Very fun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Colour_Out_of_Space
Pages