as a creator i believe that by putting stuff out there with no restrictions is the most free. people are free to use it, misuse it, abuse it, whatever. it's more imporant to be that they have that right than for me to try and control what happens to it after i put it out into the multiverse.
"Free licenses are not (and never were) about the freedom of the creators, they are all about the freedom of the end users"
If the definition of a user is someone who doesn't create derivatives or fiddle with open code, then what benefits do free softwares have to these end users other than they have the ability to share the software that they got under a copyleft license? What does it matter to these end users what license the software has? And if it doesn't matter, then why have a libre software movement at all, if not for the benefit of creators whose creations can benefit from those free cultural works?
"That's only because you're confusing the object of the context. Free licenses are not (and never were) about the freedom of the creators, they are all about the freedom of the end users. Keep this in mind and everything will get crystal clear."
I would say I do more as an end user than as a creator. And as an end user, I try to use BSD-style licensed stuff whenever possible. GPL and strong copyleft limits me as a user. That's how I feel, that's my opinion. Obviously plenty of people disagree with me and agree with Stallman. I don't.
In my opinion freedom and openness in the context of collectivism is about not placing restrictions on end user, not about making sure that "information stays free because information wants to be free." Information doesn't want anything. People want stuff. People who want to make sure that information/art/data/code stays free and anyone who uses it are locked into that same license, that is what CC-BY-SA and GPL and strong copyleft are for.
For me, as a creator: I will license my art cc0, license my code expat/mit.
For me, as an end user: I will seek out art that is licensed cc0, cc-by, or oga-by, and code that is bsd-style licensed.
IMO it is as much about philosophy as it as about confusion over viral licensing.
I definately agree with MedicineStorm. Last several days I have found myself coming back to OGA every few hours wondering "has zwonky posted any cool derivs again?"
i dont think you can cc0 something that is derivative of a cc-by-sa asset. however i don't see anything here that looks like it was actually derived from combat android. maybe you should edit it say "inspired by" combat android.
yeah i might put my hand to simples_pimples and see what I can come up with. i think i am pretty decent with the music side of the art spectrum, but my pixel art skillz are prettty subpar. i did ok with frankensteining grafxkid and surt's works for my oga jam in november though, and your recent work with simple broad purpose tileset inspires me to give it a go.
i'll scratch something up today, we can see how much we are able to expand it betwixt the two of us. it is a really good base for derivatives.
yeah you are definately doing some cool stuff with simple broad-purpose tileset and sprites.
it would be cool to see more cultures represented in this way. why don't you take a look at meso-american, african, mesopotamian, and indigenous australian art styles?
you could proabably keep expanding simples_pimples indefintely. real world mythology inspiration, fantasy, sci-fi, all sorts of stuff out there.
of course you are free to do whatever you want, let your inspiration take you wherever it takes you. im just kinda free-associating ideas based off of the derivatives you have done so far.
as a creator i believe that by putting stuff out there with no restrictions is the most free. people are free to use it, misuse it, abuse it, whatever. it's more imporant to be that they have that right than for me to try and control what happens to it after i put it out into the multiverse.
but to each their own.
i'm gonna go play super tux kart now. :p
Your original statement
"Free licenses are not (and never were) about the freedom of the creators, they are all about the freedom of the end users"
If the definition of a user is someone who doesn't create derivatives or fiddle with open code, then what benefits do free softwares have to these end users other than they have the ability to share the software that they got under a copyleft license? What does it matter to these end users what license the software has? And if it doesn't matter, then why have a libre software movement at all, if not for the benefit of creators whose creations can benefit from those free cultural works?
the youthful elf's inspiration is maybe too obvious. if anyone thinks it might be IP infringing i can redo it.
but even the big N's "original" was inspired by the big D's robin hood cartoon and traditional christmas elves so i think it is safe.
In RE: @bzt
"That's only because you're confusing the object of the context. Free licenses are not (and never were) about the freedom of the creators, they are all about the freedom of the end users. Keep this in mind and everything will get crystal clear."
I would say I do more as an end user than as a creator. And as an end user, I try to use BSD-style licensed stuff whenever possible. GPL and strong copyleft limits me as a user. That's how I feel, that's my opinion. Obviously plenty of people disagree with me and agree with Stallman. I don't.
In my opinion freedom and openness in the context of collectivism is about not placing restrictions on end user, not about making sure that "information stays free because information wants to be free." Information doesn't want anything. People want stuff. People who want to make sure that information/art/data/code stays free and anyone who uses it are locked into that same license, that is what CC-BY-SA and GPL and strong copyleft are for.
For me, as a creator: I will license my art cc0, license my code expat/mit.
For me, as an end user: I will seek out art that is licensed cc0, cc-by, or oga-by, and code that is bsd-style licensed.
IMO it is as much about philosophy as it as about confusion over viral licensing.
EZGif is best online solution IMO. They have a nice spritesheet cutter too.
I am sure there are plenty of downloadable softwares as well, I just prefer to use EZGif.
friggin adorable
I definately agree with MedicineStorm. Last several days I have found myself coming back to OGA every few hours wondering "has zwonky posted any cool derivs again?"
i dont think you can cc0 something that is derivative of a cc-by-sa asset. however i don't see anything here that looks like it was actually derived from combat android. maybe you should edit it say "inspired by" combat android.
looks cool tho
yeah i might put my hand to simples_pimples and see what I can come up with. i think i am pretty decent with the music side of the art spectrum, but my pixel art skillz are prettty subpar. i did ok with frankensteining grafxkid and surt's works for my oga jam in november though, and your recent work with simple broad purpose tileset inspires me to give it a go.
i'll scratch something up today, we can see how much we are able to expand it betwixt the two of us. it is a really good base for derivatives.
yeah you are definately doing some cool stuff with simple broad-purpose tileset and sprites.
it would be cool to see more cultures represented in this way. why don't you take a look at meso-american, african, mesopotamian, and indigenous australian art styles?
you could proabably keep expanding simples_pimples indefintely. real world mythology inspiration, fantasy, sci-fi, all sorts of stuff out there.
of course you are free to do whatever you want, let your inspiration take you wherever it takes you. im just kinda free-associating ideas based off of the derivatives you have done so far.
good work though, keep it up!
Pages