Suggerence, add indication license.
Printed From: Pixel Joint
Category: The Lounge
Forum Name: Resources and Support
Forum Discription: Help your fellow pixel artists out with links to good tutorials, other forums, software, fonts, etc. Bugs and support issues should go here as well.
URL: https://pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24834
Printed Date: 13 September 2025 at 8:42am
Topic: Suggerence, add indication license.
Posted By: torguen
Subject: Suggerence, add indication license.
Date Posted: 17 January 2016 at 1:11pm
|
Hello, I would like to suggest to the web.
Would you like the idea of including an option when publishing a work, indicating the license of the work ?. Sometimes I wanted to use some explosions on the web and I have been in contact with the creators, some designers respond, sometimes they not respond. Indicating the license of the work, it is not necessary to contact the artist. http://es.creativecommons.org/blog/licencias/ - licenses Example: 
|
Replies:
Posted By: eishiya
Date Posted: 17 January 2016 at 8:14pm
|
As you designed it, I think it adds too much visual clutter for what it's worth - only a minority would make any meaningful use of this. Most would leave it on the default, which is likely to be the most restrictive option (anything more permissive as the default is likely to cause more problems than it solves). Something to keep in mind is that PJ is not OpenGameArt, it's not a place to find art you can use. If you find art on PJ you like, the polite thing is to see about commissioning the artist for new art for you, not to ask if you can use art they already made - some artists even find the latter approach insulting. Your feature suggestion will allow artists to pre-empt these kinds of messages, which is great - as long as artists are given sufficient control over it, and are able to become informed about licensing in general. That latter part is the hard part - most have no reason to care about it. If this option is added, the default should probably be the Berne Convention (which would probably display nothing at all). If an artist wants to go out of their way to add a more permissive licence, I'm all for PJ giving them the option, as long as the licence information is a small link that is not distracting in its appearance and its location. The mockup is distracting in both ways. |
Posted By: torguen
Date Posted: 18 January 2016 at 12:48am
|
I'm sure many web visitors are users who are not registered and may think that the works do not have any restrictions, including the license gives you more confidence about using another user could do what you publish.
The mockup I did, is just that, a mockup, not mean you have to be so, pixeljoint find the right way to do it. You say that some artists may seem unpleasant to ask permission to use some of his published works but no says that other artists find it nice to see your graphics in games, as long as the artist gave permission. Pixeljoint is not a place to find art to use, that is the use you make of pixeljoint. Pixeljoint can be used to find art, as it could be an enemy or a small sprite animation, the advice is to do it the right way always with the disposition of the author of the work. |
Posted By: StoneStephenT
Date Posted: 20 January 2016 at 6:05am
| I’m likely in the minority here, but I personally don’t give a damn about people using my art (if they actually do) for their own projects or whatever. Everything is a remix and all that jazz. (And I personally believe in growing the public domain rather than shrinking it.) That said: yeah, someone can just toss in a link to a CC license in the description of a piece if they really want to add one. We don’t need to add a whole new setting for something that can already be done if an artist feels the need to do so. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 20 January 2016 at 8:10am
|
Originally posted by StoneStephenT
I’m likely in the minority here, but I personally don’t give a damn about people using my art (if they actually do) for their own projects or whatever. Everything is a remix and all that jazz. (And I personally believe in growing the public domain rather than shrinking it.) That said: yeah, someone can just toss in a link to a CC license in the description of a piece if they really want to add one. We don’t need to add a whole new setting for something that can already be done if an artist feels the need to do so. Smart minority  ------------- |
Posted By: torguen
Date Posted: 21 January 2016 at 1:17am
| Well, it all depends on the way to see, it if they believe it is not necessary to add this feature, then I will not say nothing more about the suggestion. |