Alige "art theft and improper accreditation"

[var]

Also the item was purposely never posted on the forum due to this topic viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1177

viewtopic.php?p=124461#p124461

when you will make us sign a paper in a proper contract than that forum post might be valid until then to me and probably many others that's void.

[meway]

That only helps my case... lol

[wushin]

Neither of those threads has any validity currently.
TMW currently accepts GPLv2 and cc-sa-3 dual.
We are only going on what we were left with and told.
Content is making an attempt to get it all under that and properly licensed.
Devs prior to Jenalya never kept records or a file on this.
I asked Alige to post to the forums so this conversion wouldn't filter into the IRC logs.
Plus we have a thread with this info now.

When you post to forums please be clear about where it's from, authors and license, but forums are for those who don't want to use trello.
I've heard too many bad stories about people trying to pass off copyrighted materials whether or not they knew it.
I promise you, The Content Devs care about your opinion and is actively pursuing correct licensing.

[var]

That only helps my case... lol

(that was because i saw that post was mentioned again)

Anyway i'd say, i dont know how the whole thing was made but there's also a thing called copyright sharing...

i wouldnt go that easy with "i own all the rights" when you also use something made by someone else as it seems you did,

the other frames (if ali can prove he did them as he seems he did...) are his artistic way of interpretate the mask... so...

if you did them brand new, they are yours if he did and you continued on his work well... i'd say you 2 share rights.

probably you can sue him because he used your art and he can sue you because you used his

[meway]

On the contrary I haven't altered the data sense he laid his hands on it and the alteration of this data was done only under my terms and conditions. In fact the whole idea of its existence is between me and another person who is not alige. Your making statements based on assumptions that are not in fact facts. I'm not denying that he should be credited for his contribution.

As I side argument about what is evidence. I'd like to point out that If I took a marker to the Mono Lisa I'd look like a moron if I tried taking any claim of ownership to it not to mention I would have my ass sued off for vandalism.

[var]

On the contrary I haven't altered the data sense he laid his hands on it and the alteration of this data was done only under my terms and conditions. In fact the whole idea of its existence is between me and another person who is not alige. Your making statements based on assumptions that are not in fact facts. I'm not denying that he should be credited for his contribution.

As I side argument about what is evidence. I'd like to point out that If I took a marker to the Mono Lisa I'd look like a moron if I tried taking any claim of ownership to it not to mention I would have my ass sued off for vandalism.

the other frames (if ali can prove he did them as he seems he did...) are his artistic way of interpretate the mask... so...

edit:
since it's night and i am sure you will go on and on and on i make it clearer and i'm tired to reply now
you did the 1st frame, Mr x made the other 3 then you used the result to finish the mask.
Mr x can say i made the frames and took your art as reference.
You cant copyright Mr x frames because Mr x frames are not >> yours << yours is the 1st frame.
so you edited Mr x frames and you dont know if Mr x frames are GPL...

you can say Mr x work is derivative work but you must prove it is, "assumptions" are not "facts".
How do you prove it when Mr x can detatch his 3 frames and can say that it is his art while you cant say your edit to his 3 frames are?

How can you copyright his frames now?

[Alige]

the other frames (if ali can prove he did them as he seems he did...) are his artistic way of interpretate the mask...

Finally a wise person around here, thanks var.

And for your information, Meway, here is the proof I made the Venetian Mask side frames and death frame using your first frame you made. However, I removed my Trello account because of the poor quality of art there was there, thus you might tell me "oh but you don't have proof, the deleted account can be anyone". Well sure, who else claims authorship for the side and death frames of this spritesheet?

For god's sake, I'm not here to create a war, I'm not here to troll nor bring even more chaos to these forums than there already is. All I want is for you to know what I really did and did not draw. Now if you don't believe me, that means you don't know how to check the trello or forum histories using the "Search" button, and that's just sad.

If I requested to be removed from several lines of the license file, it is because I did not work on these pieces of art. However, the rest, including the Venetian Mask, I did work on.

Regards.

[meway]

the other frames (if ali can prove he did them as he seems he did...) are his artistic way of interpretate the mask...

Finally a wise person around here, thanks var.

And for your information, Meway, here is the proof I made the Venetian Mask side frames and death frame using your first frame you made. However, I removed my Trello account because of the poor quality of art there was there, thus you might tell me "oh but you don't have proof, the deleted account can be anyone". Well sure, who else claims authorship for the side and death frames of this spritesheet?

For god's sake, I'm not here to create a war, I'm not here to troll nor bring even more chaos to these forums than there already is. All I want is for you to know what I really did and did not draw. Now if you don't believe me, that means you don't know how to check the trello or forum histories using the "Search" button, and that's just sad.

If I requested to be removed from several lines of the license file, it is because I did not work on these pieces of art. However, the rest, including the Venetian Mask, I did work on.

Regards.

Agreed. You don't need proof as I have stated that you had made contributions to it. We could probably leave it at this than

[Alige]

Good, I checked Trello, everything seems fine. The only problem left is my name written in the license file on some art that I did not do. Here is a patch that fixes this.

[Speiros02]

I noticed a brief mention as music. There is a Berne convention article, specific to music copyright, and as this is an international game, then copyright needs to be clear.
I was asked somewhere if I could provide some music to the new licence, or rather, would I, and I thought about it, and I ended up deciding against it. Why?

1) As a songwriter, I am not receiving a cent out of my music yet...actually I received my first royalties last year.
2) Under the licence, it gives permission for others to make derivatives of my work, and to profit from it, but I lose my royalties, as I would be giving permission for another artist to profit from my work...which means the only one who WON'T get any financial gain would be me...story of my life. Therefore, I am happy to ALLOW the specific music which we may agree on in the future to be used on the Manaworld game as a track without having to pay any royalties, but definitely I am NOT handing over any permissions to alter or keep my music without royalties in any OTHER derivative works. Other terms are that nobody except for me has the right to profit from using this music. Either it's used for free, or it's not. It's my music, and it's my right. Find a licence like that, and we've got ourselves a deal.
3) Some will say "But your music is getting heard"...and that's true. But I play this game for fun, not as a musical advertising campaign. Firstly, my music is heard by typing my musician name into any search engine...just about (I've seen exceptions), and secondly, it is heard by any live performances, if I choose to do them. Sure, the quality is low, but the point is, they are my songs. I intend to hold onto the ownership of that.

This has nothing to do with the graphical art, but music is also an art, and as there are many musicians out there, I'm stating this so that the knowledge is there that another alternative needs to be reached if indeed any of my music is used. The above terms are pretty much the agreement, although legal terms haven't been covered to close all loop-holes yet. I took this long to join the performing rights society, and I'll take that long before I jump into something that I feel I'll regret.

Why am I saying this? Because I'd LOVE to provide a track or two, just on an acoustic guitar, to be shared with the game. But I'm not doing it at the detriment of losing ownership of any tune or song. I may want to make a derivative of my own music. The licencing for music TO ME is unacceptable at this stage. So maybe it's worth considering a different licence for music? Seriously, I'm happy to supply on other terms.

[o11c]

Other terms are that nobody except for me has the right to profit from using this music. Either it's used for free, or it's not. It's my music, and it's my right. Find a licence like that, and we've got ourselves a deal.

The whole point of the GPL is that we *can* do that. And a license that forbids commercial use would, in fact, get us removed from all major linuxes.

But I'm not doing it at the detriment of losing ownership of any tune or song. I may want to make a derivative of my own music. The licencing for music TO ME is unacceptable at this stage. So maybe it's worth considering a different licence for music? Seriously, I'm happy to supply on other terms.

But you are *critically* misunderstanding the license.

Nothing at all in the license is exclusive. YOU, as the original artist, still completely own your work and can make derivatives under any license you choose (they just won't be acceptable for this game).

[Nard]

Speiros: Actually, TMW's music is audio files. and more, rather low quality ones, which are looped. Despite the fact, that these audio files are almost the worst "source" that you can find, people seem to think they are well licensed with GPL. You don't risk much by publishing such files here and grant TMW the right to publish the file under this license, and wish good luck to the people who want to edit them. You can keep the tune (I mean the melody and words) property with the license that you prefer (CC BY SA NC as far as I know). More, their publication can be a dated proof of your work.

[Speiros02]

Other terms are that nobody except for me has the right to profit from using this music. Either it's used for free, or it's not. It's my music, and it's my right. Find a licence like that, and we've got ourselves a deal.

The whole point of the GPL is that we *can* do that. And a license that forbids commercial use would, in fact, get us removed from all major linuxes.

But I'm not doing it at the detriment of losing ownership of any tune or song. I may want to make a derivative of my own music. The licencing for music TO ME is unacceptable at this stage. So maybe it's worth considering a different licence for music? Seriously, I'm happy to supply on other terms.

But you are *critically* misunderstanding the license.

Nothing at all in the license is exclusive. YOU, as the original artist, still completely own your work and can make derivatives under any license you choose (they just won't be acceptable for this game).

There is nothing in the Creative Commons licence that excludes others profiting from what I give free. I disagree with the licensing for removal from all linux or actually for anything, as there are other ways, whereas artists AREN'T under a CC licence, nor a GPL licence when they provide their music. I do see the improvement with the CC licence, but at the same time, it has this clause in it:
2. explicitly permits the relicensing of derivatives of works made available under that licence under this Licence or a Creative Commons jurisdiction licence with the same Licence Elements as this Licence.

I don't give permission for other games, encyclopedias, websites, or any other means available to use this, except for this game. It's not an exclusive licence, as I'm not giving exclusive rights, but I do give permission for themanaworld.org, or themanaworld.net...the game, as in a sound file, permission to use an agreed piece. But I don't give for instance, "Bob's Great Game Theme's" CD to include my work, and I believe that this is where the licence lacks. If I'm wrong, I'd appreciate the clarification, but I've looked backwards and forwards at this, and I see it as this so far. The reason for this is because although a derivative would be made, the other part of the licence would come into play which says:

*3. Licence Grant* */3A Grant of Rights/* Provided that the terms set out in this Licence are satisfied, the Licensor grants to You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright) licence to exercise the following rights: 1. Reproduce the Work; 2. incorporate the Work into one or more Collections; 3. Reproduce the Work as incorporated in any Collection; 4. create and Reproduce one or more Derivative Works; and 5. Distribute and publicly perform the Work, a Derivative Work or the Work as incorporated in any Collection.

Some of these terms on their own are acceptable, such as the distribution and public performance of the work...not the derivative works. According to the terms above, it shows that as the artist, I DO give away rights to royalties if for some strange instance that someone decided to make some money off it. It might sound minor, but I don't want to lose the ability to having a song which I wrote and release having someone else perform and make money off and lose my royalties. This licence allows for this, as technically, I am giving the rights to manaworld to make a derivative off. This can include a "version" for radio, and as long as I'm recognised as the songwriter, they are free to make their means, and yes, I'll be known as the songwriter...famous like Jerry Leiber..."Who???" you ask? Exactly my point...at least he got royalties. lol.

Anyway, if I'm wrong, or missing something, let me know.

[o11c]

I don't give permission for other games, encyclopedias, websites, or any other means available to use this, except for this game.

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way, but that's our requirement.

The whole point of GPL is to protect the rights of users to use it for anything (*). When we release something under the GPL, we *want* people to use it for "Bob's Great Game".

Because, for example, writing new music is *hard*. If I go write my own game, I don't want to have to figure out how to make music. I will go and use somebody's music that they have licensed freely.

[Speiros02]

I don't give permission for other games, encyclopedias, websites, or any other means available to use this, except for this game.

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way, but that's our requirement.

The whole point of GPL is to protect the rights of users to use it for anything (*). When we release something under the GPL, we *want* people to use it for "Bob's Great Game".

Because, for example, writing new music is *hard*. If I go write my own game, I don't want to have to figure out how to make music. I will go and use somebody's music that they have licensed freely.

Fair enough. Hence, why I can't do it either. If "Bob's Great Game" is going to make him $3000 per week and me nothing, I'd rather not be in "Bob's Great Game". Bob would be getting a free ride off me. I'd rather go to my grave with my words than let someone exploit me any more than has been already...for nothing. Still, all good, and I know there's plenty of other music that can be used. I'll look forward to hearing it.