Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Textures we can use ?  (Read 6122 times)
Akom74
Member


Cakes 9
Posts: 906


Q3A/OA Mapper


WWW
« on: July 16, 2013, 02:49:41 pm »

Hi all.

I've found theese textures pack:
http://www.philipk.net/     scroll down and you find the textures.

Tha packs are released under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en_US

I think we can use them, am i right ? Tell me, please.

Wink
Logged

...sorry for my English, i'm Italian... Tongue



Akom74
Member


Cakes 9
Posts: 906


Q3A/OA Mapper


WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2013, 11:56:02 am »

Update: for the Ancient_Collection, the readme only says:

Quote
Just a collection of really old crap.
Do what the hell you want with em Smiley

In this pack there are a lot of textures even good Tongue

I hope it can be used for OA  Grin

Wink
Logged

...sorry for my English, i'm Italian... Tongue



matija123
Half-Nub


Cakes 1
Posts: 63



« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2013, 08:33:53 am »

Well yea we can use it Cheesy, but it's gonna be useful on DeFRag mDd? I like it  Cool
Logged

“If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.”
― Mark Twain
Neon_Knight
In the year 3000
***

Cakes 49
Posts: 3657


Trickster God.


« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2013, 09:04:24 am »

I would wait for fromhell's word.
Logged


"Level Designers are 1 part architect, 1 part artist, 1 part game designer, and 1 part beta tester!" Cliff Bleszinski
Want to contribute? Read this.
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 31
Posts: 14479



WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2013, 10:37:32 am »

If it's not legally explicit and not GPLv2 compatible, I wouldn't bother.
There are very few texture packs out there that could work with the license and frankly it's probably easier and better to spend time making textures than trying to find textures and play license guessing games.  Plus with the popularity of cgtextures abuse and planetside skyboxes, you can't hold trust in any pack out there to be legally unencumbered.
Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
Akom74
Member


Cakes 9
Posts: 906


Q3A/OA Mapper


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2013, 10:47:02 am »


yes, i know it.

Even if the author say "do what you want" the pack is not released under GPLv2 and it's not free.
This is a really sad thing.... Sad

Wink
Logged

...sorry for my English, i'm Italian... Tongue



Hitchhiker
Member


Cakes 11
Posts: 180


« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2013, 05:41:53 pm »

Hi,

maybe these with little cropping and make tile-able in Gimp can be useful:
http://gpl.imageafter.com/

Logged
Suicizer
Member
Member
*

Cakes 2
Posts: 400


WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2013, 05:15:42 am »

Phillipk is trustful creator of textures. I couldn't imagen to find any textures which they seem to be based from.
Logged

I'm good at everything but can't do anything...
Gig
In the year 3000
***

Cakes 48
Posts: 4237


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 07, 2013, 08:11:55 am »

Phillipk is trustful creator of textures. I couldn't imagen to find any textures which they seem to be based from.
Noone here said Philipk is not trustful. The point is that CC-BY is not exactly GPLv2, and that "do what you want", although sounding very similar, does not include the "public domain" words.

Hi,
maybe these with little cropping and make tile-able in Gimp can be useful:
http://gpl.imageafter.com/
Interesting. One thing I noticed is that http://gpl.imageafter.com is not exactly the same thing as http://www.imageafter.com: although the two parts of the site look very similar, their term of use differ: while it looks like stuff from gpl.imageafter.com is okay, suff from www.imageafter.com is NOT complatible with OpenArena.

I just added a link to that site on the wiki, specifying to be careful about that difference. Is that okay?

By the way, talking about allowed files, AFAIK OA is licensed under GPLv2+, right? Then, can we also import "GPLv2 only" stuff or only "GPLv2+" stuff?
Note: "GPLv2+" means license text says like "[...] either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."
Another thing I have not understood is if CC-0 (very similar to Public Domain) is allowed.

Trying to sum up:
- "GPLv2+" --> YES
- "GPLv2 only" --> I DON'T KNOW
- "GPLv3 only" or "GPLv3+" --> NO
- "Public Domain" --> YES
- "GPLv1 only" --> NO (Not very diffused, maybe?)
- "GPLv1+" --> I DON'T KNOW
- "GPL" without reference to version number --> I DON'T KNOW. In the text of GPLv2 here, under 9), it mentions "If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation." (however I would suggest to handle this thing quite careful, maybe checking the extended version of the license, that should be attached or linked somewhere near to the work using it)
- "CC-0" --> I DON'T KNOW
- "CC-BY" --> NO
- "CC-BY-SA", "CC-BY-ND", "CC-BY-NC", etc --> NO
- Other free licenses (examples: LGPL, AGPL, GFDL, MIT license, etc.)--> I can guess NO
- "Do what you want" --> PROBABLY NOT, but I'm not sure (I would prefer if the author explicitly used "Public Domain" words. More, sometimes "do what you want" is accompanied by "tell me where you use it" or "mention me as author"... how to deal with them?)
- Copyrighted material --> NO
- Unknown/Unspecified license --> NO
- Dual licensing (e.g. "This file is released under GPLv2+ and CC-BY-SA 3.0") --> YES, but ONLY IF at least one of the licenses is one of those allowed (derivative files from further modifications would continue to live with OA's GPLv2+ alone?)

I would really like if Fromhell may confirm this, allowing us to write an "official" table explaining what is allowed and what not.
I know that making our own textures is better and advisable, but sometimes starting from existing images can be very useful. And it is important to know what is acceptable and what now.

By the way, a thing I haven't yet understood about GPL license... does it REQUIRE to mention original image author (and/or source), like CC-BY does, or not? Of course mentioning the original author is advisable, but is it always necessary?
Logged

I never want to be aggressive, offensive or ironic with my posts. If you find something offending in my posts, read them again searching for a different mood there. If you still see something bad with them, please ask me infos. I can be wrong at times, but I never want to upset anyone.
Suicizer
Member
Member
*

Cakes 2
Posts: 400


WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2013, 05:54:32 am »

I seriously don't see the difference between CC0 and Public Domain. Perhaps the wiki page in dutch is a bad translation =S.
Logged

I'm good at everything but can't do anything...
Gig
In the year 3000
***

Cakes 48
Posts: 4237


WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2013, 05:12:36 am »

IIRC, CC-0 is a try to express the "public domain" concept under fixed terms (due to "Public Domain" may be differently meant in different countries), thus in theory it should be even better than generically mentioning "public domain".

But official statements I read about what can be imported into OA mention only "GPLv2" and "Public Domain"... hence, a clear statement by Fromhell is required, before starting to import CC0 stuff.

This may be also the opportunity to have clear statements by Fromhell about other cases (e.g. the difference between "GPLv2 only" and "GPLv2+"). I really hope Fromhell can anwer to us, providing us a sort of "table" to sum up the various cases, as I tried to write down in the post above.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2013, 05:14:47 am by Gig » Logged

I never want to be aggressive, offensive or ironic with my posts. If you find something offending in my posts, read them again searching for a different mood there. If you still see something bad with them, please ask me infos. I can be wrong at times, but I never want to upset anyone.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: