32bpp-patch: 32bpp sprite lifting?

athanasios · Post by **athanasios** » 06 Jan 2007 02:55

...
4689_z0
4690_z0.

athanasios · Post by **athanasios** » 22 Jan 2007 03:08

Sprites Added:
trg1r.grf:
4634_z0
4635_z0

Sergej_S · Post by **Sergej_S** » 22 Jan 2007 21:15

athanasios wrote: Sprites Added (feel free to suggest - beautify):

You will allow using to me yours to the Graphics in the sets?

Your authorship - is natural - it will be specified with the indication of the country, city, your electronic address is on your choice …

Sergej

michael blunck · Post by **michael blunck** » 22 Jan 2007 22:14

You will allow using to me yours to the Graphics in the sets?

No. Because the sprites posted here aren´t original sprites but a copyright violation per se. According to the forum rules they´d have to be removed to prevent third party use of them.

regards
Michael

athanasios · Post by **athanasios** » 23 Jan 2007 05:11

I already mentioned they are modified originals! Some more, some less. Whoever has any problem with this must immediately stop playing OpenTTD, since it uses the original ones (even possesing original game I suppose, which only a few do, doesn't allow for using its sprites in OpenTTD!), not to mention about the code parts of it still beiing intact from TTD. Should this be removed too?

I understand developers are putting so much effort to change the code and I did the same with the graphics posted here! A comparison with the originals can prove this. If someone has any problems with parts of them let him help me change the rest of the sprite, instead of protesting to remove them, especially if he is talented artist who has worked so much and knows how hard it is. But some complained the same for UKRRS sets if I remember well...

Never did I mention that these should be licenced under GPL.
I hold the copywrite only for the modified parts and usage is only for OpenTTD or Simutrans. It is clear that anyone using them in commercial projects, which I dont believe will ever happen in a scale to be of concern, might have trouble with copywrite possesors of the original artwork...
This doesn't mean at all that I am doing something illegal. I didn't just copy the originals, I modified them to an extend that they are considered to be something new. (I admit I am not satisfied with all of them, work should be considered in progress and suggestions are welcome.)

I don't mind what Sergej_S does ... If he can solve the problem with half display of sprites and states the origin of these sprites clearly like I did.

michael blunck · Post by **michael blunck** » 23 Jan 2007 08:51

[on Copyright]

I already mentioned they are modified originals!

Yes you did, and exactly this makes them a violation of the original author´s copyright.

Whoever has any problem with this must immediately stop playing OpenTTD, since it uses the original ones (even possesing original game I suppose, which only a few do, doesn't allow for using its sprites in OpenTTD!), not to mention about the code parts of it still beiing intact from TTD.

Nobody claims "OTTD" to be legal in its present form.

Should this be removed too?

From a strictly legal point: yes, being based on the re-engineered original TTD software even any further developing would be pointless, except from a start from scratch.

I understand developers are putting so much effort to change the code and I did the same with the graphics posted here!

Well, why are you thinking you may "change the (copyrighted) graphics" only when other people are violating foreign copyright on software?

If someone has any problems with parts of them let him help me change the rest of the sprite, instead of protesting to remove them, [...]

You don´t see the point. You are the one having/getting problems, because you are infringing foreign copyright. And why should anyone with a clear mind take part in your illegal action?

But some complained the same for UKRRS sets if I remember well...

That may well be (I don´t know) but it doesn´t provide a legal base for you to do as well.

Never did I mention that these should be licenced under GPL.
I hold the copywrite only for the modified parts and usage is only for OpenTTD or Simutrans.

They can´t be licensed under the GPL. And you cannot hold copyright "only for the modified parts" because you may not modify these copyrighted graphics in the first place. Moreover, you cannot restrict usage to OTTD and Simutrans because everyone could technically use them for anything other.

It is clear that anyone using them in commercial projects, which I dont believe will ever happen in a scale to be of concern, might have trouble with copywrite possesors of the original artwork...

That´s not the point here. You should really inform yourself about EU and international copyright law.

This doesn't mean at all that I am doing something illegal. I didn't just copy the originals, I modified them to an extend that they are considered to be something new.

No. I seriously doubt that. It can be clearly seen that you modified Foster´s art work. Which isn´t legal.

[...] states the origin of these sprites clearly like I did.

"Stating" doesn´t suffice to make your modifications legal. Only a permission of Simon Foster would do.

regards
Michael

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 23 Jan 2007 11:11

athanasios wrote:I already mentioned they are modified originals! Some more, some less. ....
I hold the copywrite only for the modified parts ....

You can claim copyright of your new additions to the work, but cannot claim any copyright over the original underlying work. Since you do not have the permission of the copyright holder to use his work, any claim of copyright on the combined image (or parts of) is pointless. You would hardly sue someone over abuse of your copyright, when the simple truth is you are in precisely the same position.

This doesn't mean at all that I am doing something illegal.

Creating a new piece of artwork from an existing copyright work is indeed not illegal, if created for yourself and not distributed (posting here is distribution). Otherwise, yes, it is a breach of copyright.

It is worth reading about derivative works.

Best thing is to just state it as "Original artwork copyright S.Foster", and claim nothing for yourself.
The only thing you can get is applause for some nice work, but that is all.

athanasios · Post by **athanasios** » 23 Jan 2007 15:31

michael blunck wrote:[on Copyright]

Nobody claims "OTTD" to be legal in its present form.

Should this be removed too?

From a strictly legal point: yes, being based on the re-engineered original TTD software even any further developing would be pointless, except from a start from scratch.

I understand developers are putting so much effort to change the code and I did the same with the graphics posted here!
Well, why are you thinking you may "change the (copyrighted) graphics" only when other people are violating foreign copyright on software?

If someone has any problems with parts of them let him help me change the rest of the sprite, instead of protesting to remove them, [...]
You don´t see the point. You are the one having/getting problems, because you are infringing foreign copyright. And why should anyone with a clear mind take part in your illegal action?

1. So let us stop OpenTTD turn to Simutrans and finish the problem...
I suppose these are extreme actions...

2. If someone helps changing the rest of the sprite then it will become completely new artwork and not something that might be considered illegal, as it will have nothing taken from the original, like Pepsi is not Coca Cola even if they taste similar, and I hope someone will assist, if not I will have to do it. That is the goal and not to remain like they are now. For the time being let OpenTTD use original copyrighted sprites!

3. Nothing coded and claimed to be my work (Of course then credit goes to TTD art team for inspiration, which should be mentioned). From history of OpenTTD, copyright owners of TTD have not taken any action against, so I conclude they will not mind for this also. If this is not the case I will have to remove them till I change them completely. Personally I would be happy if someone else took my artwork and made something better, if he gave credit to me for inspiring him. Hope original artists have same point of view and not think like Micros...t. Then we will have to fight about how many pixels define a new artwork ... Well, without their fine work we wouldn't be discussing now... (Thanks Foster and rest of team)

jonty-comp · Post by **jonty-comp** » 23 Jan 2007 17:50

Hey, I'll use these anyday! I don't really care about the copyright.

Sergej_S · Post by **Sergej_S** » 23 Jan 2007 20:44

athanasios wrote: I don't mind what Sergej_S does ... If he can solve the problem with half display of sprites and states the origin of these sprites clearly like I did.

Thank - you - friend!

You already acted in my protection - thank once again!

Sergej

Killer 11 · Post by **Killer 11** » 23 Jan 2007 21:40

Well i don't know about MB's copyright stuff now... Owen actualy has links to ALL the TT games and theyre abadonware and as we know that means nothing so we are SOOOO breacking the law, we not only distribute the gfx, we distribute the code, we make open source clones out of it, and somehow one guys little project suddenly becomes the bigges violator?

Post by **Dave** » 23 Jan 2007 21:47

Editing graphics without the owner's permission and conditions is likely to ruffle many feathers.

DO NOT ask Simon Foster, because the answer will be no, and it'll probably mean a whole lot of other work is messed with as well. I e-mailed him asking for the use of one sprite for a non-TT related matter and only after he checked the conditions of the contract when signing copyright over to the publisher did he e-mail me back saying it was allowed as long as it wasn't part of a commercial development. That was for NON-TT related purposes though.

michael blunck · Post by **michael blunck** » 23 Jan 2007 22:43

Killer 11 wrote:Well i don't know about MB's copyright stuff now...

Although some issues have been discussed here over and over again, it´s a fact that there are always people who obviously can´t profite from it.

Owen actualy has links to ALL the TT games and theyre abadonware [...]

Let´s recall what Josef Drexler (Patchman) says:

Patchman wrote:> so why does chris sawyer say thats its inlegal to download "any" version of tt(d)

Because the copyright hasn't expired yet. That'll take another 70 or so years starting from when he dies.

Until then, all downloads of TT(O|D) are illegal unless you have explicit permission by the copyright holder.

And the concept of "abandonware" doesn't exist [emph. mb]. It's a legal fiction some people have created to justify their (still illegal) actions of downloading games that aren't for sale anymore. It's just as illegal as downloading Windows XP. Just perhaps slightly less chance of prosecution...
_________________
Josef Drexler

http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=349120#349120

Simply try to decipher what he wrote.

regards
Michael

athanasios · Post by **athanasios** » 24 Jan 2007 01:25

Personally I believe it is:

1 violation of human rights
2 act against the progress of humanity
3 the product of extremely low IQ people or better 'homo ...'

:to make laws that impose copyright issues about artwork (and other things also) to such an extend.

This shapes my actions and I am not going to change them regardless of any illegal laws, which I defy, as I have done in the past and added a small brick for more freedom in my country and the civilized world. I hold to my ideas, and I respect other peoples point of view.

I thank all for expressing their opinion (these matters have been discussed over and over many times) and I hope we will now
do some work, than to continue to discuss such things in this thread.

Quinnyowns · Post by **Quinnyowns** » 24 Jan 2007 03:12

athanasios wrote:Personally I believe it is:

1 violation of human rights

Do you even know the European Convention on Human Rights?

I believe you'll find NOTHING on this topic, other than perhaps the right to property under protocol 1, which, if anything would be against you rather than in your favour.

I don't know where you're from, and personally I don't care. Patriotism does not justify violation of copyright.

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 24 Jan 2007 03:34

athanasios wrote:Personally I believe it is:

1 violation of human rights
2 act against the progress of humanity
3 the product of extremely low IQ people or better 'homo ...'

:to make laws that impose copyright issues about artwork (and other things also) to such an extend.

You clearly have never tried to earn a living by producing artwork. I have - as a photographer (see my links). I have had everyone from website image thieves, to newspapers, and even my own clients, steal my work and try to not have to pay for my creations.

For some artists - like S.Foster - copyright is the ONLY protection they have from thieves stealing their art and saying "its fair game", "everyone does it", "it contravenes my freedoms (to be a thief)".

Copyright laws were one of the first laws that had pretty much unanimous world approval with the Berne Convention (not sure about China's status). Almost all countries signed up, and then enshrined the convention with their own local laws of enforcement. So US copyright law is the equivalent of EU, of Russian, of Australian, etc, and copyright is enforceable across country boundaries.

Copyright matters - but we all breach it at some point or another. (eg. make a copy of a CD to keep the original undamaged, and then Bill asks if he can borrow the CD to listen to. You could pass him the original, and be legal. You cannot pass him the backup copy. Such an action is trivial though.)

Within OTTD, we rely on the disinterest of the copyright owners to decode and distribute what we do. However, the graphics are the one component that we require there to be original files supplied. Yes, there are sites where you can download it, but they run the greatest risks of major fines.

Making derivative works that partly replace the original graphics do not raise them to some "free" status. A very talented artist spent a long time creating the whole look and feel of TT - people should show a bit more respect.

Killer 11 · Post by **Killer 11** » 24 Jan 2007 12:47

michael blunck wrote:
Owen actualy has links to ALL the TT games and theyre abadonware [...]

Never ever cut up my sentences to change theyre meaning. That makes me very angry and makes you look like you're lieing...

Owen actualy has links to ALL the TT games and theyre abadonware and as we know that means nothing

I SAID that it means nothing

And also

Quinnyowns wrote:
athanasios wrote:Personally I believe it is:

1 violation of human rights
Do you even know the European Convention on Human Rights?

I believe you'll find NOTHING on this topic, other than perhaps the right to property under protocol 1, which, if anything would be against you rather than in your favour.

I don't know where you're from, and personally I don't care. Patriotism does not justify violation of copyright.

Do you know of discrimination? Becouse this is discrimination, people here breack exact same laws with projects and ddownload links, they upload TT(D) on sites illegaly and it's 100% obvious, yet no one gives a damn about them, they only attack one person of them all. I say we either ingore this thing or if we really want to be 100% legal we get rid of everything at once, otherwise it's unfair that only one person gets beaten up here.

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 24 Jan 2007 18:52

Killer 11 wrote:
Owen actualy has links to ALL the TT games and theyre abadonware and as we know that means nothing
I SAID that it means nothing

You said "that" means nothing, but the antecedent of "that" is ambiguous. It could be either "Owen has links to all TT games" or "abandonware".

Killer 11 wrote:Do you know of discrimination?

Illegal discrimination is based on things that cannot be changed: race, gender, creed, &c. Mere actions are not grounds for a discrimination claim.

Sergej's choice to implicitly claim full credit for "his" graphics set him up to be slammed. If you were to take MB's graphics, or Simon Foster's, or Zimmlock's, and pass them off as your own, you'd get exactly the same treatment.

Killer 11 · Post by **Killer 11** » 24 Jan 2007 19:33

Ok for the "abandonware" part my english is still abit bad so i make mistakes. Sorry for that.
About Sergej, well i believe athanasios isn't claiming full credit for these gfx(not that it changes anything)

Also AFAIK noone gave a permision to recode slope gfx to make support for build on slopes too. Also almost all the roadsets use TTD's original grass in them and if we are being harsh on copyrights it is technicaly editing the original sprite and claiming it to be your creation, same falls for most bridgesets as they use original rail or road sprites too.

All that athanasios is doing is making Toyland abit more pleasant and he is progressing quite well. Why stopping him now when he made quite some sprites? If you are so offended by him breacking the rights why did you react just now? This topic was here for quite some time

Born Acorn · Post by **Born Acorn** » 24 Jan 2007 19:42

athanasios wrote:Personally I believe it is:

1 violation of human rights
2 act against the progress of humanity
3 the product of extremely low IQ people or better 'homo ...'

:to make laws that impose copyright issues about artwork (and other things also) to such an extend.

I'd like to see what would happen to any lawbreakers who attempt to apply this to laws about their crime.

Transport Tycoon Forums

32bpp-patch: 32bpp sprite lifting?

Is a 32bpp color and minor alterations "lifting" of original graphics worth to work on?

Who is online