Licenses and usage

[Mr.Mo]

Allright, since lately there is controversy about people sellign their games or not, I think people that contribute scripts and resources should also add a license to it or a note atlease, for example;

Copyright Shark_Tooth 2006

This script is Open Source and can not be used in commercial games freely. Pleace contact the author for how much he wants.

or;

Copyright Shark_Tooth 2006

This script is Open Source and can be used in commercial/non-commercial games freely. Please credit the Author.

Both inside the script and the post.

This would clear up alot of things.

 

[Ceroscuro]

It'd be a courtesy but is in no way necessary. I almost think it'd be better if people didn't put that because it would force people to ask, thus filtering out only those who are somewhat dedicated.

 

[Despain v.1]

I think that it's a good idea to be suggested to scripters and resource creators, although I don't see how it could be reasonably enforced.

 

[Wings]

Although this may seem appropriate in some scenarios, I would have to agree with Serenade & Dz. The idea of scripters or spriters licensing their materials that they make openly available to the public seems a bit frivolous.

 

[sandgolem]

This script is Open Source and can not be used in commercial games freely. Pleace contact the author for how much he wants.

If you decide to use something like this, try this instead:

This script can not be used in commercial games without permission.

That way you're not necessarily saying you'll charge for it and interested people may contact you, instead of coming off as a guy who wants to be paid if someone uses it.

 

[Durastik]

By saying it's open source means that it can be used in a commercial game.

Peace

 

[FoxDemonSoavi]

I do not think they should add that. Typicaly, you have to ASK someone if you can use it in a commercial game. I would prefer if the person wanting to use it had to ask. IT is less trouble for everyone overall and makes it so only the people really dedicated to their projects get that far.

 

[Mr.Mo]

By saying it's open source means that it can be used in a commercial game.

Peace

XD, no....

I dunno, I thaught it would clear up some questions like;

Can I use your script if I want to sell my game?
How much do I have to pay?

It wouldn't be easy to enforce but most members, when they submit their resources, they use a template. So you can add it to a template.

 

[kip]

and you lead to piracy even more geez people youre geting awful asking these days continue as it was and shut up

 

[Mr.Mo]

and you lead to piracy even more geez people youre geting awful asking these days continue as it was and shut up

What the hell.. Read the damn topic before saying shit.

Most people make free games. Most people, if not all, let their resources and scripts be used in games for free.

This is just an option for people. They don't have to do it.

Btw, we are breaking the law anyways. There is nowhere in this forum that says, not to my knowledge;

"All scripts/resources posted here are submitted for free public use unless stated by the Author of the resources and/or scripts."

Since nothing says that, any scripter or artist or w/e can sue someone here for usign their script and/or resources. Why? Because there is no where that says they are releasing it for public use.

and don't give that common sense b/s. Do you think the court of law would really care about common sense.':|

If there is something like that around, then good for you.^_^

I'm just trying to help, don't get my intensions wrong.

 

[BlackStaticWolf]

and don't give that common sense b/s. Do you think the court of law would really care about common sense.

As a person who works in the legal field, I can tell you that yes, as a matter of fact, courts DO care about common sense. It's actually one of the deciding factors in civil cases regarding unjust enrichment.

 

[Mr.Mo]

Tell me this;

me " He is using my script in his game and I never said he can use it, i just posted it so people can learn from it."

other guy "Come on, its common sense that he posted for us to use it in our games or else he wouldn't post it in public"

Tell me who would win?

 

[Wings]

Tell me this;

me " He is using my script in his game and I never said he can use it, i just posted it so people can learn from it."

other guy "Come on, its common sense that he posted for us to use it in our games or else he wouldn't post it in public"

Tell me who would win?

The guy in bold. For the simple fact that the post did not clarify the scripter's or spriter's intent on distribution. Without notice of copyright or intent (restrictions) on distribution...they have no case.

 

[BlackStaticWolf]

The guy in bold. For the simple fact that the post did not clarify the scripter's or spriter's intent on distribution. Without notice of copyright or intent (restrictions) on distribution...they have no case.

No. At least not in the US. As what I say below is actually an English Common Law doctrine, it may very well apply in Ireland as well. I can't say for certain though.

Tell me this;

me " He is using my script in his game and I never said he can use it, i just posted it so people can learn from it."

other guy "Come on, its common sense that he posted for us to use it in our games or else he wouldn't post it in public"

Tell me who would win?

The game's creator (herein after "defendant") is deriving benefit from the use of the scripter's (herein after "plaintiff"") work. This is undeniable. The question is, was the plaintiff justly compensated for his work and did he give consent for it to be used in the manner that is was? Further, did he intend for the script to become public domain?

The very fact that the plaintiff is challenging the game's use of his script says two things:
1) No, he did not give consent.
2) No, he did not intend for the script to become public domain.

The plaintiff's claim is fairly logical and adheres to simple application of common sense. He intended to provide the code as an example to help others learn. He did not intend for someone to use it in a commercial game, at least not without paying him.

The defendant's claim is a statement that essentially says that he misunderstood the plaintiff's intent. The defendant's interpretation of the plaintiff's intent is directly contradicted by the plaintiff himself.

Even if the material evidence is ambiguous (and it usually is... cases like this are typically "plaintiff's word vs. defendant's word"), the plaintiff is likely to prevail. This is because courts do not like letting one individual profit from the work of another without compensating the second individual for said work. The judge would likely order the defendant to pay the plaintiff a reasonable fee, but the game would be allowed to be distributed as is.

Of course, if the game is actually being sold, that further weighs the case in favor of the plaintiff.


Some factors that could contribute to a different decision... the context of the public posting of the code. Is it a context that would give a reasonable man the impression that the code was free for all to use for whatever purpose? If the plaintiff didn't specify that HIS code was NOT free for all to use in such a situation, that could affect the outcome. However, the court would still place considerable favor on his argument if the game is being sold.

As I said, courts really disapprove of unjust enrichment.

 

[Mr.Mo]

Most people copyright their work, of course there is no case if they don't.

Anyways,i realized, it depends on the jury or judge.

Edit:
@BlackStaticWolf, i didn't see your post; I'm not going to argue with you, you know more about law then me.

 

[BlackStaticWolf]

Most people copyright their work, of course there is no case if they don't.

Actually, that's a common misconception. Intellectual property rights exist with or without copyright. Having a registered copyright strengthens (or weakens depending on who you are ) your case considerably, but it is not necessary to bring a cause of action or to prevail.

 

[|3_32]

Well, there is a simple way around it, all the resource creators who wish money, only have to post part of the script and state how much they want for the rest, same for other resources. As soon as you post the whole thing on the forums its automatically out of your hands as to who uses it where. Thats Common sense

 

[alexanderpas]

How about we're going to optionally use creative commons!

Spoiler: if you need to be credited

http://creativecommons.org/icon/by/deed.gif[/img]
Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor.

Spoiler: if you don't want your work to be used for commercial purposes

http://creativecommons.org/icon/nc/deed.gif[/img]
Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.

Spoiler: if you don't want any derivative works

http://creativecommons.org/icon/nd/deed.gif[/img]
No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.

Spoiler: if you allow derivative works but only if the same restiction apply on those works as there are on the original

http://creativecommons.org/icon/sa/deed.gif[/img]
Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under a license identical to this one.

Choose a lisence: http://creativecommons.org/license/index_html?lang=en

ofcource, you can use a dual license module
for example

Spoiler: this post is copyrighted

choice1:
http://creativecommons.org/icon/by/deed.gif[/img]http://creativecommons.org/icon/nd/deed.gif[/img]
Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
Specification Just put my name somewhere in it!
No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.

choice2:
http://creativecommons.org/icon/nc/deed.gif[/img]http://creativecommons.org/icon/sa/deed.gif[/img]
Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under a license identical to this one.

 

[kip]

This will be going way out of hand creating a forum group that works for free and have less quality and people who are elites and charges

 

[Anonymous]

Except the creative commons doesn't seem to have something about specifying restrictions around commercial games except not to do it. What would you put if you would allow it to be used in commercial games, but only for royalties?

And really, this is not just a "problem" with scripts, but with all resources.