Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove noncommercial licensed assets #173

Closed
IBPX opened this issue Jul 20, 2016 · 13 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@IBPX
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 20, 2016

Many assets in this project are covered by a Creative Commons license including a noncommercial (NC) clause. I think this is unsuitable because it is against both the Open Source Definition and the Debian Free Software Guidelines, which both require that the license "shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale." The Open Source Definition goes on to state:

Rationale: By constraining the license to require free redistribution, we eliminate the temptation for licensors to throw away many long-term gains to make short-term gains. If we didn't do this, there would be lots of pressure for cooperators to defect.

This means that the assets of the project are not considered "open-source", and the Tuxemon project as a whole will not be allowed in the Debian repositories, and by extension many Debian-based distributions, such as possibly Ubuntu.

I think all assets should be required to have a license compatible with Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike.

Currently, these assets are:

From what I can tell, all of the other assets are compatible with CC BY-SA, with the possible exception of sounds from Kelvin Shadewing, which use the XYG Open Source License v1.1, of which I cannot find an online copy of.

To fix this, I think we can go through each offending item and replace it with one compatible with CC BY-SA, one by one.

@Sanglorian

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 20, 2016

Agreed!

You might be interested in the thread where I talked about some replacement music.

As mentioned in that thread, another option is to contact the creators and ask them to consider also licensing their work under a free and open licence.

@IBPX

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 20, 2016

Thanks. As William mentioned in the thread, we can attempt to contact the existing artists to see if they're willing to relicense. This thread can serve as a place to suggest replacement tracks and such, and I'll keep this post updated with a list of which we still need to replace.

List

@bitcraft

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 20, 2016

While I do support open source software, I tend to feel games are almost always better off under a different set of "open" standards. Games have the potential to be very lucrative and history has shown that there is no shortage of people who will bundle up software (especially games!) and sell in a way that diverts money and attribution from the creating parties.

I'll offer my opinion that I support the non-commercial clause. Tuxemon is a game and doesn't fit the same model as say gnu grep would. Grep is great and benefits a great deal of software and people, but tuxemon is a game and a niche game at that. I cannot say that the world would benefit in the same way, and I don't feel their licenses should be the same, either.

@IBPX, I want to thank you though, for looking into all the legal aspects of the individual assets. Its great to know that somebody is keeping track of it. It's really my least favorite thing to do.

@IBPX

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 20, 2016

Looking at all of the above tracks, it looks like they have licenses similar too, but not actually Creative Commons licenses. Also, Ending Song's license actually says it can't be used by anybody. Cali's Overworld Template and Trainer Sprite Spree don't have any license at all attached, it seems.

@IBPX

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 20, 2016

@bitcraft Nobody will buy a game from you that they know (and you legally have to disclose, IIRC) is free, unless you're buying a physical copy. Also, if they are diverting the attribution from the creating party, what they're doing is against the license and the law, and they can be sued.

Also, if they wanted to sell it, they could just remove the small amount of assets that have the noncommercial license, and they would be able to sell it anyway.

@bitcraft

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 20, 2016

Sorry, I didn't mean to derail the thread....I'll save my opinions for another time. Anyway, I do agree that non-conforming assets should be removed or have their current license changed to conform.

@Sanglorian

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 20, 2016

I've made a "library" of some open-source, 8-bit music that we have access to, and what roles I think each piece could fill:

http://tuxemon.referata.com/wiki/Music_Library

I'm not sure what the current, non-compatible music is being used for at the moment, so I'm not sure which pieces to suggest as replacements.

@bitcraft

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 25, 2016

I think this might be a good opportunity to maybe set some restrictions on the music/sound. If we end up not using the bulk of our existing music/sound, then maybe we could have a style guide for new audio like we already have for graphics.

What I mean is that, it would make the game seem more polished if we didn't have a large range of musical instruments. If we could, for example, just say that all music should be composed of "16-bit era synth samples", and we locked down the instruments for all music to use it would be really nice, I think.

Just a thought. If we have to start over, it would be a nice time to set the musical style that we're looking for.

@IBPX IBPX closed this Jul 25, 2016

@IBPX IBPX reopened this Jul 25, 2016

@alexgleason

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Dec 23, 2016

This means that the assets of the project are not considered "open-source", and the Tuxemon project as a whole will not be allowed in the Debian repositories, and by extension many Debian-based distributions, such as possibly Ubuntu.

Would they really, though?

For instance, there's a pretty long and good article about font licensing on GNU/Linux distributions. Now the SIL Open Font License is the accepted norm for fonts, which is very clearly a different license than the ones used for software. Specifically, it restricts people from selling the fonts by themselves.

  1. Neither the Font Software nor any of its individual components,
    in Original or Modified Versions, may be sold by itself.

This is because fonts are often viewed as creative works in addition to functional software, so a compromise has been made.

The Free Software Foundation even recommends using CC-BY-ND for opinionated pieces featuring audio/video.

I personally agree with you all that everything should be shared, not just software. However I don't believe that it's necessary to purge all assets that don't allow reselling, unless there is a genuine barrier it presents. The Debian and Ubuntu guidelines say nothing about assets, only software, so I think it's fully possible they would accept these assets.

@MirceaKitsune

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Dec 23, 2016

I didn't realize some assets are CC-BY-NC-SA. That might be a problem to be fair, including putting the game on Linux package repositories. Not sure if this is a reason it's not included on https://software.opensuse.org which does include most FOSS games.

@Sanglorian

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Oct 31, 2017

I think thanks to the commits of the last couple of months, this issue has been resolved. Those assets should all have been deleted.

@MirceaKitsune

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Oct 31, 2017

I noticed a lot of asset replacements as well, figured it must be for this purpose. Someone should double-check to make sure that's all of them just in case. Thank you for the lovely work everyone!

@IBPX

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Nov 2, 2017

Thanks everyone. I'll close this issue now.

@IBPX IBPX closed this Nov 2, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.