how to ask for proper license and prevent stillborn contrib

WuTangH - Aujourd'hui à 17:06
If someone isnt active on TWT... few new tree models are out :slight_smile:  http://www.thewolfteam.org/forum/index.php?topic=735.msg6889#msg6889
illwieckz - Aujourd'hui à 17:15
@WuTangH  that looks good, btw because of copyright law, no one can reuse them until you put a viable license explicitly allowing the reuse, the derivative work, and the redistribution (no license = everything is forbidden, it means any map baking these models is illegal and shipping a pk3 containing them is illegal too).
A “viable license” is something like that for example: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
WuTangH - Aujourd'hui à 17:41
@illwieckz  hm.. If I simply write in readme "You are free to use these models on whatever you want." ..isnt it enough? :smile:
illwieckz - Aujourd'hui à 17:44
that's better, but since there is ready to use nicely written licenses out there, why not using it? assuming you want to keep attribution,  the corresponding CC license to "You are free to use these models on whatever you want” is the CC By one: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
you probably have seen many community indie games being greenlit on steam and never published? for most of them, that's because they used asset some random contributor posted on irc channel 10 years ago and now steam is asking for author and license proof for every single file but the random guy using random nickname on random channel is obviously unreachable 10 years later, so after 10 years of hard work, the game is dead ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
WuTangH - Aujourd'hui à 17:49
well, I can include this licence.. just to have "clean table".. but its not like Im gonna sue someone if he wont give me credits or smth heheh
illwieckz - Aujourd'hui à 17:50
the question is not about sueing someone, that's why I gave you the steam example but the risk is the same for every platform distribution
if the guy who reuses your work wants to publish his derivated work on a distribution platform, the distribution platform don't mind about you "not gonna sue someone", no author and no license stating explicitly it's allowed means it's not allowed and leads to a refusal
it's not about money or sueing people etc. That's unfortunate but the copyright law in all country of this world is written the way if nothing is publicly allowed it means everything is forbidden :confused:
and it starts to be very hard today to be distributed outside of official distribution platform, all OS have an integrated app store now and they can headshot any project whenever they want
that's why 1. giving proper permission explicitly is very helpful, 2. using a well-known license any lawyer already have heard about instead of some custom own words is very very helpful, it's just about paving way to eternity :p
WuTangH - Aujourd'hui à 17:57
okey.. Will this be enough? or needs more text? :D
" All these models are under Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
See here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ "
illwieckz - Aujourd'hui à 17:58
yes (assuming the author name is still in the readme of course :stuck_out_tongue:  )
WuTangH - Aujourd'hui à 17:58
oh, nickname only :smile:
illwieckz - Aujourd'hui à 17:58
well, that's enough
nickname is valid
WuTangH - Aujourd'hui à 17:58
okey
illwieckz - Aujourd'hui à 17:59
I was thinking about "nickname" while typing "name"
on internet, even a name is a nick name :p
WuTangH - Aujourd'hui à 18:02
oki, its reuploaded.. thanks for advice :wink:
illwieckz - Aujourd'hui à 18:10
thank you very much, :thumbsup:
it's just to be sure your own work is not stillborn :wink: