it is a suggestion on the jam to upload submissions to oga but it is not a requirement of the jam. i always upload my own music here, but i'm not so sure that what i put up is "more (good) music" my stuff is pretty mediocre but i enjoy making it.
problem is that the apritesheets are kind of "locked into" the executable file by clickteam fusion. i could include the sprite sheets as a seperate file, but it would not be the actual image used by the game code. which makes me wonder if having the images embedded in the exe would be a form of drm? i know this stuff has been discussed ad-nauseum so sorry to beat a dead horse.
for a while i was only using cc0 stuff from here because atleast i knew that i wasn't gonna be out of pocket by just attributing and not worrying about the technicalities of the game engine. the share alike licenses don't work for me, i don't want to re-release an edited sprite where all i did was move the character's eyeball or some such.
when i first started hobbyist gamedev back in the 90s i used sprites ripped from old game roms. back then there wasn't much in the way of freely available stuff like there is now. these young whipper snappers have it great with all this high quality open content. i used to have to walk uphill both ways to school with no shoes on. seriously though, there is so much good stuff to use why risk a cease & desist?
about the door: i would argue that there are multiple ways to draw a door. in fact, because i am uncomfortable with the door in this sprite (not because it doesnt look good, but because it looks so much like lttp's door) i editing a door from a different cc0 sprite sheet and fitting it into the pallette of buch's house.
about russia and all that: i think this gets into another very tricky area. copyright law is different everywhere. i live in america, i don't where medicinestorm is from. but her interpretation aligns with my understanding of american copyright law. if a work is in any way derived from another work then it is derivative. how this would play out in court, and what "fair use" is under copyright law is all complicated and hard for us laypeople to understand. there is a reason why cc licenses have a "human" readable version so non-lawyers can try to understand the terms. but there is also a reason why those "human readable" versions are not the actual licenses and they explicitly tell you that what you are agreeing to is the terms of the lawyer'speak license, not the explanation of the terms in the "human readable" form.
i am trying to keep in mind both what is ethical and what is legal, and using rational, logical analysis to determine what is ok both ethically and legally. but i am a video game nerd who dropped out of college because i didn't like math. i am not a trained ethicist or a lawyer.
ultimately you will, as an individual, have to decide what is ethical and legal for you to do, and you will also have to accept the consequences (positive or negative) for those choices. noone at opengameart can make you use the art found on here, they can't make you follow the license the work is provided under, and likely will not sue you if you don't follow it. they can't stop you from using it correctly, and they can't really stop you from using it incorrectly. there may be consequences to using it incorrectly, but you will ultimately make your own choice. and maybe Kutejnikov will come and punch you in the nose for stealing his gun and turning it into a 1x1 black pixel. probably not.
for the sake of the conversation, i went ahead and drew (very poorly) a gun in mspaint. i did not copy the image from above and "trace" over it with layers, i just used it at as "drawing reference" and redrew it in mspaint. this file is therefore derivative work, atleast based on my understanding of american copyright law. so Kutejnikov can actually come and punch me in the nose if i don't release this under the terms of the license that he licensed it to me as. so in the spirit of that, this stolengun.png file is a derivative work of
changes were made by rrodg84 and all license requirements of the original license apply to the derivative work.
furthermore, i could not (atleast in my understanding of the cc-by license) use this stolengun.png artwork in the game i am working on because i use a proprietary game engine, to which i am licensed distribution of the runtime, but not licensed the abilty to distribute (or even access) the source code of that runtime. so the technological measures of the cc-by license would be violated by my inability to allow other users to edit the actual graphics file that is used by the runtime, i could include the stolengun.png file in my distribution and give attribution, but that solengun.png file would not be the ACTUAL image that was displayed by the runtime.
i know this all seems like splitting hairs and making mountains out of molehills. in a way it is. copyright law and fair use is a gray area all over the internet, and fair use doesn't come into play with the files on this site because it is dedicated to "free" and "copylefted" artworks.
thanks to all for the explanation. i understand it alot better now, and why it sucks.
this was the winner of the first weekly chiptune music jam https://itch.io/jam/weekly-chiptune-music-jam/results
money sucks. it's too bad you have to have it to buy ramen.
it is a suggestion on the jam to upload submissions to oga but it is not a requirement of the jam. i always upload my own music here, but i'm not so sure that what i put up is "more (good) music" my stuff is pretty mediocre but i enjoy making it.
sdl code is good for building gamepad support too
https://itch.io/jam/weekly-chiptune-music-jam-3
would love to see some more participation, we are starting small but hopefully will get more interest!
https://itch.io/jam/weekly-chiptune-music-jam-2
problem is that the apritesheets are kind of "locked into" the executable file by clickteam fusion. i could include the sprite sheets as a seperate file, but it would not be the actual image used by the game code. which makes me wonder if having the images embedded in the exe would be a form of drm? i know this stuff has been discussed ad-nauseum so sorry to beat a dead horse.
for a while i was only using cc0 stuff from here because atleast i knew that i wasn't gonna be out of pocket by just attributing and not worrying about the technicalities of the game engine. the share alike licenses don't work for me, i don't want to re-release an edited sprite where all i did was move the character's eyeball or some such.
when i first started hobbyist gamedev back in the 90s i used sprites ripped from old game roms. back then there wasn't much in the way of freely available stuff like there is now. these young whipper snappers have it great with all this high quality open content. i used to have to walk uphill both ways to school with no shoes on. seriously though, there is so much good stuff to use why risk a cease & desist?
about the door: i would argue that there are multiple ways to draw a door. in fact, because i am uncomfortable with the door in this sprite (not because it doesnt look good, but because it looks so much like lttp's door) i editing a door from a different cc0 sprite sheet and fitting it into the pallette of buch's house.
about russia and all that: i think this gets into another very tricky area. copyright law is different everywhere. i live in america, i don't where medicinestorm is from. but her interpretation aligns with my understanding of american copyright law. if a work is in any way derived from another work then it is derivative. how this would play out in court, and what "fair use" is under copyright law is all complicated and hard for us laypeople to understand. there is a reason why cc licenses have a "human" readable version so non-lawyers can try to understand the terms. but there is also a reason why those "human readable" versions are not the actual licenses and they explicitly tell you that what you are agreeing to is the terms of the lawyer'speak license, not the explanation of the terms in the "human readable" form.
i am trying to keep in mind both what is ethical and what is legal, and using rational, logical analysis to determine what is ok both ethically and legally. but i am a video game nerd who dropped out of college because i didn't like math. i am not a trained ethicist or a lawyer.
ultimately you will, as an individual, have to decide what is ethical and legal for you to do, and you will also have to accept the consequences (positive or negative) for those choices. noone at opengameart can make you use the art found on here, they can't make you follow the license the work is provided under, and likely will not sue you if you don't follow it. they can't stop you from using it correctly, and they can't really stop you from using it incorrectly. there may be consequences to using it incorrectly, but you will ultimately make your own choice. and maybe Kutejnikov will come and punch you in the nose for stealing his gun and turning it into a 1x1 black pixel. probably not.
for the sake of the conversation, i went ahead and drew (very poorly) a gun in mspaint. i did not copy the image from above and "trace" over it with layers, i just used it at as "drawing reference" and redrew it in mspaint. this file is therefore derivative work, atleast based on my understanding of american copyright law. so Kutejnikov can actually come and punch me in the nose if i don't release this under the terms of the license that he licensed it to me as. so in the spirit of that, this stolengun.png file is a derivative work of
Submachine Gun (Scorpion-inspired) and licensed under CC-by-4.0
changes were made by rrodg84 and all license requirements of the original license apply to the derivative work.
furthermore, i could not (atleast in my understanding of the cc-by license) use this stolengun.png artwork in the game i am working on because i use a proprietary game engine, to which i am licensed distribution of the runtime, but not licensed the abilty to distribute (or even access) the source code of that runtime. so the technological measures of the cc-by license would be violated by my inability to allow other users to edit the actual graphics file that is used by the runtime, i could include the stolengun.png file in my distribution and give attribution, but that solengun.png file would not be the ACTUAL image that was displayed by the runtime.
i know this all seems like splitting hairs and making mountains out of molehills. in a way it is. copyright law and fair use is a gray area all over the internet, and fair use doesn't come into play with the files on this site because it is dedicated to "free" and "copylefted" artworks.
great discussion though
Pages