I noticed your account keeps getting deleted because people are flagging you as a spammer. Then I noticed the tag you used. Would you like to update the tags on this submission before it happens again?
IIRC it was you the person that commented that it had not free license inside the archive file. The the creator said something like "I deleted the file with proprietary license and stick with OGA-BY3". I found that asset on itch and here so I writed comment here "Will you sync license here and on itch?". Then I got email that duplicates comment "Ah yes I'm having trouble with licenses. Unfortunately, I cannot make my own
on OGA. If that is a problem, I guess I'll just have to remove it from OGA". :\
Yes the history is retained and includes license. That scenario you outlined is one reason for the history, but a submission changing from a permissive license like CC0 to a more restrictive one like CC-BY-SA is pretty rare. Be cautious with using previous versions of submissions. They are usually changed for good reason. Often that reason is that the original license was never valid to begin with and the submitter was correcting it to account for derivative attribution.
Do you have a specific example in mind? You have only downloaded one asset (while logged in) so that is the only asset you'd be able to "prove" that you downloaded at an earlier time.
@DustDFG: ^Yep. What Umplix said. In fact, drummyfish and I consulted an attorney about exactly that scenario.
But you are correct when you say "in a philosophical way". The difference between "derivation" and "inspiration" is philosophical. If you were inspired by some other work of art, and made your own, it is NOT a derivative. If you used some other work of art as a component or baseline for making your own, it IS a derivative. The line between inspired and derived is often fuzzy and only exists philosophically.
Unfortunately, there is legal precident surrounding that philosification, and believing in the "wrong" philosophy can still get you in trouble legally.
I noticed your account keeps getting deleted because people are flagging you as a spammer. Then I noticed the tag you used. Would you like to update the tags on this submission before it happens again?
Is it an elephant?
opens fine for me. Can you take a screenshot of the page you're seeing?
...And what was the follow-up comment to that? https://opengameart.org/content/coolpunk-puzzle-platformer-asset-pack
Yes the history is retained and includes license. That scenario you outlined is one reason for the history, but a submission changing from a permissive license like CC0 to a more restrictive one like CC-BY-SA is pretty rare. Be cautious with using previous versions of submissions. They are usually changed for good reason. Often that reason is that the original license was never valid to begin with and the submitter was correcting it to account for derivative attribution.
Do you have a specific example in mind? You have only downloaded one asset (while logged in) so that is the only asset you'd be able to "prove" that you downloaded at an earlier time.
if that's how you made them, then they aren't derivatives.
Yes, there's really no point in having duplicate assets on the site.
Lovely. Is this a combination of https://opengameart.org/content/old-fruits and https://opengameart.org/content/fruits-3 or is there additional content?
No correction on copyright/attribution notice. Unless there is new information forthcoming, I must remove this submission soon.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
@DustDFG: ^Yep. What Umplix said. In fact, drummyfish and I consulted an attorney about exactly that scenario.
But you are correct when you say "in a philosophical way". The difference between "derivation" and "inspiration" is philosophical. If you were inspired by some other work of art, and made your own, it is NOT a derivative. If you used some other work of art as a component or baseline for making your own, it IS a derivative. The line between inspired and derived is often fuzzy and only exists philosophically.
Unfortunately, there is legal precident surrounding that philosification, and believing in the "wrong" philosophy can still get you in trouble legally.
Pages