Civ2, FreeCiv and the GPL nitty-gritty

[St Leo]

AFAIK:
- if it's your original work, you hold the full copyright whether you GPL it or not
- therefore, you can distribute it under any number of terms, including GPL. If someone wants to use it under non-GPL terms, they can pay you for a whatever license you agree on.
- however, once you GPL something, you can't un-GPL it
- GPL means that:
a) people are free to modify the work
b) if they want to distribute the modifications, they can only do so under the GPL

[fairline]

This is a bit disconcerting. I agree with Mercator here; I don't want anybody making money out of artwork I post for free. Harry's idea of making Freeciv-compatable material while explicitly not allowing it to be included in packages which are subject to the GPL seems to be a safe way forward.

One question: what protection does copyright give to prevent others from ignoring my wishes and including my work in GPL-licenced Freeciv packages anyway? Leo mentions that they would need to seek my agreement for this to take place; is that the case?

[Yog-Sothoth]

Originally posted by curtsibling
I think Mercator has a damn good point.

Signing up to merely give away your ideas or work is crazy.

*snip*

The contract-holders get all the advantage, while original creator gets sidelined.

I think not.

Sharing is great...
When it is sharing, and not highway robbery. (I don't mean Freeciv here!)

I think I for one, will pass up the Freeciv thing - No offence intended.
I like my CIV2 graphics creation as a hobby.

I will keep the legal stuff for my real-life freelance work.

The GPL is not for everyone, but saying the original creator don't benefit from it is not correct. Everyone profits from the "pool" of GPL software. The larger it gets the higher an asset it becomes for everyone.

And if you think you don't use any GPL software, you should think again. Most of the underlying services and architecture of the Internet are mostly based on Open Source software like Bind, Sendmail, Apache, etc which work on top of open standards. Without it, Internet as we know it today would not have existed.

And I strongly encourage everyone here to always use a license for the material you create. For instance the Creative Commons is a good choice for those who don't want it to be used commercially.

And lastly, there must be a lot of crazy people in the world then since the Open Source Community is huge

--

I think the terms of the GPL and the Creative Commons have been sufficiently presented now, and we could end this before it turns into an argument. Of course, if anyone has any further questions they are free to ask.

[curtsibling]

It never was going to be an argument.

A person has a choice about what he does with his own work.
And no amount of cursing and debating will change that, Mr Sothoth.

And thank you, I am quite aware of the contractual basis of many web sign-up areas.
And being an ex-character designer for the BBC, I also know the legal pitfalls of freelance work too.

PS
And it's true, there are a lot of crazy people in the world.
But the 'sane' protect their ideas and work.

No malice intended, just having my say.

Good day to ya.

[Yog-Sothoth]

Originally posted by curtsibling
It never was going to be an argument.

A person has a choice about what he does with his own work.
And no amount of cursing and debating will change that, Mr Sothoth.

And thank you, I am quite aware of the contractual basis of many web sign-up areas.
And being an ex-character designer for the BBC, I also know the legal pitfalls of freelance work too.

PS
And it's true, there are a lot of crazy people in the world.
But the 'sane' protect their ideas and work.

No malice intended, just having my say.

Good day to ya.

You can choose whatever you like, I don't care. However, I want GPL to be presented correctly, and I responded to your ill-informed scaremongering.

For the rest:
- As far as I know I haven't cursed in any of my posts in this thread
- I don't know why you go on about web sign-up as I haven't said anything about that whatsoever
- It's you who called them crazy, I responded to your use of the term. They are probably more aware of these issues than most and don't need any "protection". It would rather be the other way around.
- And lastly I do take objection to you calling the GPL for robbery. Educate yourself on the matter before making such strong accusations

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by curtsibling
I think Mercator has a damn good point.

Signing up to merely give away your ideas or work is crazy.

For instance:
The main reason I never sign up to any of the current web art galleries is because
I refuse to give over the permission for other people to just reproduce my
work and do what the heck they like with it.

Yes, and I know it is all bound in legal codes and contractual jargon.

I can read between the lines, however.

The contract-holders get all the advantage, while original creator gets sidelined.

I think not.

Sharing is great...
When it is sharing, and not highway robbery. (I don't mean Freeciv here!)

I think I for one, will pass up the Freeciv thing - No offence intended.
I like my CIV2 graphics creation as a hobby.

I will keep the legal stuff for my real-life freelance work.

CS, everyone

At the moment nothing has been released under the GPL. The tileset is still a work in progress.

The graphics you see momentarily in the Freeciv 2.0 graphics thread are just that. A work in progress. I will only release when it's offically ready. And I'm sure it doesn't include unauthorized work. If you ask I'll remove your work from the tileset at once.

That is also the reason I've been contacting various of the older Freeciv scenario artists. I just want to use some of their work , not all of it. Without their permission I couldn't use anything of their stuff at all. If I'm not able to contact them, I won't use their work. Yes, it is a shame but it certainly isn't my intention to post someone else 's work under the GPL. It certainly isn't my intention either to shovel everything someone made into the GPL.

As for the credits, it is my full intention to to credit everyone 's work. All 59, down to the last unit. The reason I've removed everyone's tag, including my own. Is because at the outset I used the original Hires* set as a starting point.
That one didn't include tags. But it did list the authors in the tileset (right bottom row) and also in the units.spec with their full names.
Using the Hires set as a template I also removed the pink and purple backgrounds of the Civ2 units because I thought Freeciv couldn't do two transparent background colours (you need two colours) to make tags appear. In the meantime I've discovered that with the isometric tiles the underside of the "diamond" will dissappear ingame. So that means tags can be included.

I also have a huge workfile that includes everyone's units complete with all the tags. So it is to easy to put everyone's tag back where it belongs. Although it could be difficult with some of the units that have multiple authors


Finally two things. While we're discussing the implications of the GPL licence right here. Derived works or original. Copyright is all around us. The Civ2 graphics we use in our tilesets, even a smidgeon, are copyrighted. They come with a far stronger and more limiting license then the GPL does. Don't forget to see the forest from the trees.

Most importantly, don't forget this is a hobby. Go ahead and enjoy yourselves. Throughout the years I've enjoyed playing many of the Civ2 scenarios out there. And I've learned making them can be just as fun. I hope they will still be there in the future.







* The Hires tileset also suffers from a flaw. Notice the roman Phalanx in the top row, fourth from the left? That's one of Erwan' s units. Look closely and you'll see the top of the spear is missing. That makes it a derivative of his work. However I don't see a mention in the unit.spec. Probably it's just an honest mistake. But if we follow the high road it will have to be removed in the end.

[Yog-Sothoth]

Originally posted by CapTVK
* The Hires tileset also suffers from a flaw. Notice the roman Phalanx in the top row, fourth from the left? That's one of Erwan' s units. Look closely and you'll see the top of the spear is missing.

To me it looks like the unit fourth from the right also (the legion) isn't as it should be. It looks like it's clipped (down to the left) ?

[Mercator]

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth
How is not using a license gonna give any protection at all? (other than Copyright which apply automatically, and is not lost if you GPL just to clearify that).

From what I understand on the Creative Commons website, "All Rights Reserved" is the default option, so no license is the safest option.

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
I propose a compromise. As was stated, artwork that can be used for Freeciv does not necessarily have to be GPL.

Originally posted by St Leo
- therefore, you can distribute it under any number of terms, including GPL.

Except terms that contradict the GPL, like requiring attribution or restricting it to noncommercial use only.

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth
The GPL is not for everyone, but saying the original creator don't benefit from it is not correct. Everyone profits from the "pool" of GPL software. The larger it gets the higher an asset it becomes for everyone.

I agree completely, for software (which the GPL is really designed for), because it is largely a group effort. Code can be used and re-used, and probably most importantly, code isn't very personal, nor is it art. Multimedia is an entirely different matter.

I'd have no problems writing a big chunk of code and letting everyone do with it as they please. I would have a problem if I were to make a beatiful drawing and everyone would do with it as they pleased.

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth
You can choose whatever you like, I don't care. However, I want GPL to be presented correctly, and I responded to your ill-informed scaremongering. (...)

I don't think Curt meant to say that anyone was cursing. I think that he was trying to point out that there was nothing to turn into an argument. So any possible future cursing/debating (as possibly implied by the term "argument") would be pointless.
And I don't think he was attacking the GPL per se, just speaking in general terms and from possibly bad personal experience.


And just to be clear, I never doubted your good intentions, CapTVK (or anyone else).

[CapTVK]

Thanks Mercator,

Atually I'm glad you've brought the point up. It's a thorny issue and I hope this debate can clear up misconceptions and also present some different viewpoints (from coders, players and artists) . Then we may reach a shared agreement.


I'm a bit pressed for time right now. I'll be back tomorrow.

In the meantime, keep things civilized

[Yog-Sothoth]

Originally posted by Mercator
From what I understand on the Creative Commons website, "All Rights Reserved" is the default option, so no license is the safest option.

I see now that it could be seen as a retorical question, but I was wondering Yes, "All rights reserved" is probably the "default". Sounds reasonable.

Originally posted by Mercator
I agree completely, for software (which the GPL is really designed for), because it is largely a group effort. Code can be used and re-used, and probably most importantly, code isn't very personal, nor is it art. Multimedia is an entirely different matter.

I'd have no problems writing a big chunk of code and letting everyone do with it as they please. I would have a problem if I were to make a beatiful drawing and everyone would do with it as they pleased.

I can see that people can have a different attitude towards art. The GPL is actually gonna be revised next year, to clear up some areas that has come to attention over the years. It will be int. to see what they come up with.

Originally posted by Mercator
I don't think Curt meant to say that anyone was cursing. I think that he was trying to point out that there was nothing to turn into an argument. So any possible future cursing/debating (as possibly implied by the term "argument") would be pointless.
And I don't think he was attacking the GPL per se, just speaking in general terms and from possibly bad personal experience.

Probably, and I might have been overreacting. I do however think he used some phrases that I think was uncalled for.

Originally posted by Mercator
And just to be clear, I never doubted your good intentions, CapTVK (or anyone else).

Indeed, I didn't doubt that either.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by CapTVK
* The Hires tileset also suffers from a flaw. Notice the roman Phalanx in the top row, fourth from the left? That's one of Erwan' s units. Look closely and you'll see the top of the spear is missing. That makes it a derivative of his work. However I don't see a mention in the unit.spec. Probably it's just an honest mistake. But if we follow the high road it will have to be removed in the end.

Well, if you're going to start like that...

The 3rd unit on the first row is almost definitely a derivative of a Micrprose unit (from one of the FW scenarios). The catapult graphic is the mangonel graphic from an early beta of Age of Kings, turned into a Civ2 graphic by Harlan. The Knight, Crusader and Chariot quite probably use horses lifted from Civ2 graphics. As for all other HiRes units, are you really sure that they were all adapted from photos in the public domain?

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth You can choose whatever you like, I don't care. However, I want GPL to be presented correctly, and I responded to your ill-informed scaremongering.

Mr Sothoth.
I made a comment, as is my right as a poster here, and as a free man.
I made not vindictive word at Freeciv, for which I had only praise.

So please do not lash out with personal attacks and unfair comments at anyone who dares speak.

We don't need the peace of mind of the forum distrubed so.

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth For the rest:
- As far as I know I haven't cursed in any of my posts in this thread

It's a figure of speech...Nothing more.

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth - I don't know why you go on about web sign-up as I haven't said anything about that whatsoever

I was using it as an example of web-pitfalls that can lead to you losing control of your own work.

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth - It's you who called them crazy, I responded to your use of the term. They are probably more aware of these issues than most and don't need any "protection". It would rather be the other way around.

I said it was crazy to give away the rights to your work.

So kindly get your facts correct before protesting my posts.

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth - And lastly I do take objection to you calling the GPL for robbery. Educate yourself on the matter before making such strong accusations

Ahem! - This is unfair.
Allow me to reinforce my post.

Since you chose to not even read it.

Sharing is great...
When it is sharing, and not highway robbery. (I don't mean Freeciv here!)

I still stick to my stance.
You attack me for having an opinion - Good for you.

But if you guys seek to have any graphic people doing stuff for Freeciv;
You are going about it in a very strange way...

[curtsibling]

Well - I apologise for getting heated here.
I merely don't like being talked to like a half-wit.

So, for the third time, no malice is intended to the Freeciv chaps.

I just have my opinion about people getting their work sold from under them.

I hate to see unhappy speech in poly CIV2 forums,
So let us say no more on the matter, and move on.

[Yog-Sothoth]

Originally posted by curtsibling

*snip*

So please do not lash out with personal attacks and unfair comments at anyone who dares speak.
Ahem! - This is unfair.
Allow me to reinforce my post.

Since you chose not even read it.

*snip*

I still stick to my stance.
You attack me for having an opinion - Good for you.

I have made no personal attacks, if you construe them as such I apologize. Neither did I deny you your right to have an opinion. The topic here was the GPL and as you made a follow up on a comment made by Mercator on just that topic I don't think it's strange that I saw your post in that light.

I agree that giving away the rights to your work like your web sign-ups example is nothing I would like to do either, but that is not comparable to the GPL license.

So if I'm guilty of anything it was for thinking you were refering to the topic, and not for attacking you for having an opinion.

[curtsibling]

I too have apologised for anything that may have caused offence.

We both have definite views on the subject, and continued debate will not change it.

I guess people will do what they feel best for themselves.

Any CIV stuff I happen to make is public domain. (with permission)
I will protect my own artwork however.

Nothing more to say on the topic.