ok after lots of thought, license poll

[Alltaken]

why would ANYONE pay for a blender file that is available at cost-of-distribution

my entire argument stems from this quote.

and my answer to this is.
"because the buyer doesn't know that it is available for free"

the GPL never mentions you need to say its free software before selling it, it only requires that you need to include the source code and license.

please look at this page.

http://www.luxuriousity.com/

the person has sold at least 2054 copies of software through Ebay alone.

estimate that he would have sold another 1/2 that number through his website thats about 3000. at $15 profit each cd, he has earnt $45,000 from Open source software. and is doing it legally (except for his copyright infringment on the images he shows at his site)

Look at the prices that stolen models from here could get.

http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/I ... ullPreview
http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/I ... ullPreview
http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/I ... ullPreview
http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/I ... ullPreview
http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/I ... ullPreview
http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/I ... ullPreview


you get my drift? these models being sold for $54 are really rather crappy models. the ones people here would be making are much better.

and the thing is, under the GPL that would be legal to sell under the rules, as it would include the Source code in the sale.

this is my problem.

BTW patch sprites do not have source code, so they are easier to deal with, whereas when we move to 3d modelling, with rendered output, it is becoming more difficult, and the art can be far more easily ripped off.

question: Can i release the rendered images under GPL? (you said i could release a non source object under GPL) i am curious. because then the GPL and CC would be compatible.

Alltaken

[Villem]

I seen people sell models from Unreal Tournament 2003 there..

[trucido]

question: Can i release the rendered images under GPL? (you said i could release a non source object under GPL) i am curious. because then the GPL and CC would be compatible.

None of us are lawyers, as far as I can tell. I would almost recommend you to email like the FSF and see what they have to say about your question on just being able to say the final image is released under the GPL, I have a feeling though they'll say your blender files are "source" files. As part of the "freedom" of the GPL is being able to modify, and you'd be taking that "freedom" away. It does raise some interesting questions. If someone were to release say an mp3/ogg sounds of what have you, would they have to release the .wav files on request as well? Shrug, I dont know.

$45K isn't anything for open source software, look at companies like Red Hat. They make millions from linux(while not technically selling linux), you can even download Fedora free, yet people still buy boxed copies, thats just one linux distro. Or look at the database arena, how many web hosting companies are using MySQL/PostreSQL and making millions. Anothing example would be the mozilla project. Which you might want to check out the MPL. Clicky.

If you don't want people selling your stuff, then an "open source" license isn't going to work for your requirements, and work with the GPL, imho. Trying to find a license that's compatiable with the GPL isn't easy.

I would almost recommend, if you want to release graphics that are free, but not "open source" and non-commericial use only then do it outside of the ottd project sort of like how the GRF files are. Thats probably going to be your only way around it. That way, you and every other artist can pick what lisence fits best for your needs. Because going by your statements, the Red Hats, the FreeBSDMalls, etc shouldn't be able to distribute your work and make money. Which both would be doing.

Again, IANAL, and my 2c.

[Alltaken]

I would almost recommend, if you want to release graphics that are free, but not "open source" and non-commericial use only then do it outside of the ottd project sort of like how the GRF files are. Thats probably going to be your only way around it. That way, you and every other artist can pick what lisence fits best for your needs. Because going by your statements, the Red Hats, the FreeBSDMalls, etc shouldn't be able to distribute your work and make money. Which both would be doing.

actually this is the difficult area.

i do want people to be able to distribute the GFX, and don't mind if they make money from it.

the GFX in their own right are not valuable, and are only really useable in OTTD.

however the Source files, are very valuable, and this is all i don't want being distributed for money.

its a fairly large problem. one that i don't know of any open source game ever tackling. i know a few artists from other games, and they don't release their source files at all, and don't release the GFX under any license that they know of (they assume its under the GPL or somthing)

and yes thanks for the suggestion, i may be very inclined to write to one of those groups.

Alltaken

[DaleStan]

$45K isn't anything for open source software, look at companies like Red Hat. They make millions from linux(while not technically selling linux),

I believe what they sell is support for Linux. (and the convience of not having to compile your own kernel.)

however the Source files, are very valuable, and this is all i don't want being distributed for money.

and yes thanks for the suggestion, i may be very inclined to write to one of those groups. [Creative Commons, FSF]

If you talk to the FSF you probably aren't going to get a license that prohibits for-profit use of the 3D source files. You might also try the OSI, but I make no guarantees. Your best bet may be to find a competent copyright and/or IP lawyer and say: "This is what I want; write a license," but that'll probably cost you a bundle of money.

[Alltaken]

the final suggestion is this.

there are core game graphics. which are under the GPL, and can be distributed or sold. these can all be distributed by others packaging OTTD, and these graphics will be enough to play OTTD

ALL Ground tiles
basic track types
basic road types
vehicles (which users don't mind donating)


Then there are Expansion graphics. which can be published either under the GPL, or the CC

when the game is run it checks a master server for game graphics and offers you the option to download other graphics.

these new downloaded graphics are under either the GPL license or the CC license. (which bypasses all the GPL rules about distribution)

the system would also serve as a way to monitor and choose sprite sets, and new sprites when they are published (so you are always up to date with the latest graphics)


that would solve much of the problems.

-----------my personal way i will publish my graphics------------

I will GPL my ground sprite files. which means everyone else must GPL theirs afterwards. (since i created all the standardised files that will make making graound sprites almost instant)

I will put the track type files under an optional GPL-OR-CC license (so that people can either publish their track types under CC or GPL, but after they have choosen a license any further changes by others would obey the first creaters license, unless arranged personally with them to change it, otherwise they can use my file and put it under whichever license they like)

I will put my Camera, and lighting files under GPL

I will put my trees and other items like lamp posts under GPL

I will put my runway markings and pieces under GPL

I will put the texture settings and cargo types under GPL

I will put my radio tower, airport buildings, radar station, and any other building under CC. i will put some bridges, tunnels... under CC. but some under GPL (to be distributed with the game)




i think this will solve most of the problems.

The artist gets to choose which they use, for those who don't mind the GPL then i would recomend they use the GPL.

Also i would consider offering an option (when submitting the GFX and source file) to have the GPLed 3d files added to Turbosquid under an OTTD account. all sales of these files would have any proceeds go to an OpenTTD fund to pay for the graphics server bandwidth, or any other OTTD costs. (coments?) this way we could beat the abusers to the punch, and be earning money morally rather than leaving space for someone to be earning money imorally.


Alltaken