I would say that taking a screenshot is the same as copying the image but the game engine is still creating the image in the first place.
For the zip file, I would consider this as a collection rather than an adaptation. The difference with the rendered frame of a game is that a single image is being produced using a combination of other images.
Just had a look at CC NC. I think this would make a good licensing option for this site. For the artists that depend on commercial game development to make a living out of their artwork, it would give them a lot more freedom to share their work.
After some thought, im convinced that CC BY SA work cannot be used together with commercialy licensed assets.
Lets say you took a CC BY SA background image and a closed licensed character sprite, used gimp to place the character on the background and redistributed the resuling image file. Since the new image file was made from a CC BY SA asset, the new image also has to be redistributed under the same license. Since the image was also derived from closed license artwork, this would be a breach of the owners copyright.
This above is really no different than what a game does. For each frame rendered, a bunch of different assets are combined to make one image and displayed to the player. Its doing it in a different way but the resulting image is the same. The fact that the rendered frame is not a saved image file is irrelevant since the player could capture the image by taking a screenshot and saving it.
So in the worst case, the game itself would not be required to be released as CC BY SA or another open license, but all of the game outputs would be.
thanks for sharing your analysis of the license. I think the ambiguity with cc by sa is whether the game is considered to be an adaptation of the artwork used and hence would all need to be released under the same license. I have seen varying opinions on this point and having read the license, i cant say im clear about it. Logically you might expect it to apply seperately to a single asset but i wouldnt say that its clear in the license. On the commercial side, im referring mainly to the contributors that submit a sample of their work and post a link to their website. a commercialy restrictive license would allow them to submit all of their work foor use in non commercial projects.
Heres a game I made using these.
http://www.kongregate.com/games/rdansie/bouncing-ball-of-doom
Heres my flappy jam entry using your art http://rdansie.itch.io/tappy-plane
Plus and minus buttons to add to the set
Awesome work. Heres my entry using your art.
http://rdansie.itch.io/confectionery-crush-adventure
Thanks! Heres a 2d chocolate tile/platform.
A pause button in the same style would also be great
I would say that taking a screenshot is the same as copying the image but the game engine is still creating the image in the first place.
For the zip file, I would consider this as a collection rather than an adaptation. The difference with the rendered frame of a game is that a single image is being produced using a combination of other images.
Just had a look at CC NC. I think this would make a good licensing option for this site. For the artists that depend on commercial game development to make a living out of their artwork, it would give them a lot more freedom to share their work.
After some thought, im convinced that CC BY SA work cannot be used together with commercialy licensed assets.
Lets say you took a CC BY SA background image and a closed licensed character sprite, used gimp to place the character on the background and redistributed the resuling image file. Since the new image file was made from a CC BY SA asset, the new image also has to be redistributed under the same license. Since the image was also derived from closed license artwork, this would be a breach of the owners copyright.
This above is really no different than what a game does. For each frame rendered, a bunch of different assets are combined to make one image and displayed to the player. Its doing it in a different way but the resulting image is the same. The fact that the rendered frame is not a saved image file is irrelevant since the player could capture the image by taking a screenshot and saving it.
So in the worst case, the game itself would not be required to be released as CC BY SA or another open license, but all of the game outputs would be.
thanks for sharing your analysis of the license. I think the ambiguity with cc by sa is whether the game is considered to be an adaptation of the artwork used and hence would all need to be released under the same license. I have seen varying opinions on this point and having read the license, i cant say im clear about it. Logically you might expect it to apply seperately to a single asset but i wouldnt say that its clear in the license. On the commercial side, im referring mainly to the contributors that submit a sample of their work and post a link to their website. a commercialy restrictive license would allow them to submit all of their work foor use in non commercial projects.
Pages