"this means you may use my stuff with credit, but not use it for commercial purposes."
That isn't what the license means, actually. You selected CC-BY-SA, not CC-BY-NC. All licenses on OGA allow for commercial use. Are you hard set against that?
The swordgirl image is an attachment on one of surt's comments, not an actual art submission page.
The difference being surt uploaded the swordgirl file to OGA (as a comment attachment) as opposed to all previous images in which surt uploaded the files to his own personal website, then remotely linked to them from OGA. For example:
Hosted on Wikipedia: (remote link)
Hosted on OGA: (comment attachment)
Neither pixel art cube file has been added to an art submission page on OGA, though. If Wikipedia were ever to go down, the first image would stop appearing here since the remote link would no longer be valid. The second link would remain because the file is hosted on the OGA servers. (And if OGA servers were to go down, it wouldn't matter because you wouldn't be able to access this page at all)
I didn't put every file surt has ever commented upon into this submission, just the ones where the original host went off line and caused the images to disappear. Now that the files above are submitted and hosted on OGA, though, the images in surt's comments have reappeared because the "remote" links lead to OGA instead of a nonexistent server. Thus my description above:
"...many of the images and links on that forum thread have broken. This submission is just a way to host the assets locally..."
@Apollo14: ...?? Too short for what? They aren't corrupted or damaged as far as I can tell. Since one is an intro and the other is a looping segment, the song is technically of infinite length. Rather, the song is as long as it takes your players to beat the boss. :D
Gotcha. That won't be found in this submission because it was already submitted to OGA directly. This is a copy of all the stuff that was on surts web host before it was shut down. Things submitted to OGA since then will not be resubmitted to OGA on this submission.
The best part is, I don't even have to check what you're asking about. If its on OGA, it is free for commercial (or private) use, forever, irrevokably. :D
Even more so Cougarmint's art. She goes full-send with the generous terms of use for her openly licensed art as long as she is properly credited.
I hope you're right, dannorder. I think this is great art and I think this is great technology.
These submission are not locked becuase someone told me they violate copyright and I just believed them. They were locked because there is an unkown factor that we have to research to understand. This is the reason any submission gets locked on OGA. If it were a permenant decision, it wouldn't be locked. It would be deleted.
"...In the absense of new court cases on AI art copyrights, we should default to like, you know, the actual copyright laws and not what some vocal subset of highly misinformed people on social media say..."
I'm so glad we agree. The decision to flag the submissions above had nothing to do with anything anyone said on social media. Vocal subet, or otherwise. Misinformed or not. It was based on actual copyright laws as interpreted by actual professional legal experts. The thing that kicked all this off was the recent presence of several new court cases on AI art copyrights, such as as Andersen et al v. Stability AI Ltd. et al, linked above. We no longer have an 'absence of new court cases' to stand in.
I am familiar with the Google cases you refer to. They are even mentioned in the 2nd video I linked above. Google was affirmed by a court to be able to do all the stuff it does by way of Fair-Use and, as I stated above:
"Although there may be a "Fair-Use" defense for such assets, the licenses used on OpenGameArt.org require the legal terms to be on more solid standing than Fair-Use alone."
If anyone is villainizing AI art, I haven't seen them do it here. Here we are just learning new things and doing what we can to keep the archive up and flourishing.
That isn't what the license means, actually. You selected CC-BY-SA, not CC-BY-NC. All licenses on OGA allow for commercial use. Are you hard set against that?EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
The swordgirl image is an attachment on one of surt's comments, not an actual art submission page.
The difference being surt uploaded the swordgirl file to OGA (as a comment attachment) as opposed to all previous images in which surt uploaded the files to his own personal website, then remotely linked to them from OGA. For example:
Hosted on Wikipedia: (remote link)
Hosted on OGA: (comment attachment)
Neither pixel art cube file has been added to an art submission page on OGA, though. If Wikipedia were ever to go down, the first image would stop appearing here since the remote link would no longer be valid. The second link would remain because the file is hosted on the OGA servers. (And if OGA servers were to go down, it wouldn't matter because you wouldn't be able to access this page at all)
I didn't put every file surt has ever commented upon into this submission, just the ones where the original host went off line and caused the images to disappear. Now that the files above are submitted and hosted on OGA, though, the images in surt's comments have reappeared because the "remote" links lead to OGA instead of a nonexistent server. Thus my description above:
@Apollo14: ...?? Too short for what? They aren't corrupted or damaged as far as I can tell. Since one is an intro and the other is a looping segment, the song is technically of infinite length. Rather, the song is as long as it takes your players to beat the boss. :D
@Emcee Flesher: Thanks for pointing that out: about a sixth of the images were missing from the .zip file.
Fixed.
Gotcha. That won't be found in this submission because it was already submitted to OGA directly. This is a copy of all the stuff that was on surts web host before it was shut down. Things submitted to OGA since then will not be resubmitted to OGA on this submission.
Can you indicate which specific surt comment the missing ones are from?
Re: Pixabay license. These are definitely still legit. Anything submitted to pixabay before 1/1/2019 is irrevokably CC0.
Yes it does, Pitagora, yes it does.
The best part is, I don't even have to check what you're asking about. If its on OGA, it is free for commercial (or private) use, forever, irrevokably. :D
Even more so Cougarmint's art. She goes full-send with the generous terms of use for her openly licensed art as long as she is properly credited.
I hope you're right, dannorder. I think this is great art and I think this is great technology.
These submission are not locked becuase someone told me they violate copyright and I just believed them. They were locked because there is an unkown factor that we have to research to understand. This is the reason any submission gets locked on OGA. If it were a permenant decision, it wouldn't be locked. It would be deleted.
I'm so glad we agree. The decision to flag the submissions above had nothing to do with anything anyone said on social media. Vocal subet, or otherwise. Misinformed or not. It was based on actual copyright laws as interpreted by actual professional legal experts. The thing that kicked all this off was the recent presence of several new court cases on AI art copyrights, such as as Andersen et al v. Stability AI Ltd. et al, linked above. We no longer have an 'absence of new court cases' to stand in.
I am familiar with the Google cases you refer to. They are even mentioned in the 2nd video I linked above. Google was affirmed by a court to be able to do all the stuff it does by way of Fair-Use and, as I stated above:
If anyone is villainizing AI art, I haven't seen them do it here. Here we are just learning new things and doing what we can to keep the archive up and flourishing.
Ooh, nice.
Page bookmarked.
Pages