If only some of them were archived, how did you obtain them? Before the site went down?
Is there any examples in the archvie that show CC0 in the description? If I can see that, I can trust that the Pixiv customizable license link is not just a default setting overlooked by the author.
"Your title and preview images must be descriptive of the content you actually uploaded. Specifically, if what you uploaded is a sample of a larger pack, the preview image must describe the art you actually uploaded to OGA, and not the additional art that you are advertising. It is fine to link to the larger pack in your description."
Furthermore, The extra restriction you've specified in your License.txt, "You are not allowed to: Redistribute or resell the assets, whether in original or modified form." and "You are not allowed to: Include these assets in asset packs, tools, or any form of direct asset distribution." conflicts with the license, CC0, which allows both of these things. There are practical reasons for permitting things like "reselling" and "redistribution"; without it, the asset can become legally unusable, even if that isn't your intent. Would you be willing to omit that restriction?
Please let me know if you have questions about this. Until then, I must flag this submission so others cannot use it in a way you may not approve of.
Apologies: The extra restriction you've specified, "Restrictions — Reselling of these assets is strictly prohibited." conflicts with the license, CC-BY 3.0. Specifically, the very section it appears to replace:
"No additional restrictions— You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits."
There are practical reasons for disallowing restrictions like "no reselling"; it can make the asset legally unusable, even if that isn't your intent. Would you be willing to omit that restriction? Please let me know if you have questions about this. Until then, I must flag this submission so others cannot use it in a way you may not approve of.
Groovy. Looks good. Thanks for preserving these. Are these original characters? None of them are fan art of other characters, right?
If only some of them were archived, how did you obtain them? Before the site went down?
Is there any examples in the archvie that show CC0 in the description? If I can see that, I can trust that the Pixiv customizable license link is not just a default setting overlooked by the author.
Nice. Where is the original license indicated?
Nice work!
It is fine to link to your premium tileset pack here, but you cannot display assets that you are not actually sharing here in the previews. See Submission Guidelines: https://opengameart.org/content/art-submission-guidelinesFurthermore, The extra restriction you've specified in your License.txt, "You are not allowed to: Redistribute or resell the assets, whether in original or modified form." and "You are not allowed to: Include these assets in asset packs, tools, or any form of direct asset distribution." conflicts with the license, CC0, which allows both of these things. There are practical reasons for permitting things like "reselling" and "redistribution"; without it, the asset can become legally unusable, even if that isn't your intent. Would you be willing to omit that restriction?Please let me know if you have questions about this. Until then, I must flag this submission so others cannot use it in a way you may not approve of.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
Thank you. Please also include the "CREDITS.TXT" you are referencing.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
Thank you, but the restriction is still present in the license.txt inside the .zip file.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
Because this is a derivative, you must include the credits for Clint Bellanger and license this CC-BY-SA 3.0. See his credits instructions:EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
Yep. Thanks.
Just FYI, you don't need to remove the .flp, just rename it.
Apologies: The extra restriction you've specified, "Restrictions — Reselling of these assets is strictly prohibited." conflicts with the license, CC-BY 3.0. Specifically, the very section it appears to replace:There are practical reasons for disallowing restrictions like "no reselling"; it can make the asset legally unusable, even if that isn't your intent. Would you be willing to omit that restriction? Please let me know if you have questions about this. Until then, I must flag this submission so others cannot use it in a way you may not approve of.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
Nice. Reminds me of the Laputian robots in Castle in the Sky
Pages