I apologize to extrem123 for the use of the words 'lazy' and 'greed'.
Also sorry, if you think that I accuse you of sloppy working - that's not true. On the contrary, I want you to succeed in your endeavour - why else would we be asking for sprites if we wouldn't care?
I very much appreciate you sorting through the mess of licenses and creating a sound pack which *can* be distributed - though I wonder whether
Jupix server doesn't host an up-to-date version. It is VERY tedious work as there's not a single license for this project which was chosen initially. Sadly a mistake made back years ago and which cost lots of nice sprites. In this project and elsewhere.
While it was never intended as personal attack, I think this whole thread shows also well that a word of caution with
license issues here and there is not wrong:
OPS wrote:"why not just reuse existing graphics"(...)
I managed to find a couple more uncoded graphics that were too unique to reuse existing ones, so I coded them and added them in.(...)I would be happy to upload it if there is a demand and it is ok for me to do so. I don't know who created most of the stuff I have used
and later after a word of caution
OPS wrote:maquinista wrote:The main problem is that You need permission before You use the graphics.
This is for my own use until this issue is resolved.
Good. But many things written in this thread are easily mis-understood and in order to avoid other people jumping to false conclusions, I rather make things clear. Later again we have to read:
Michi_cc wrote:OPS wrote:Everything included in the pack is only what is already released, and therefore already has compatible licenses.
This is a wrong statement unless with "compatible license" you mean an explicit statement like "I allow redistributing my graphics" (or an explicit license declaration that includes such provisions, like GPL or CC-*). If no such statement exists, normal copyright laws apply which thus means "all rights reserved".
But here we go, all is fine.
OPS wrote:
I had the same problem as you. Took me a long time to gather everything that is publicly available and work it all out. I could put together a revised pack without the dubious tiles that don't have a clear license.
Now:
extrem123 wrote:@ OPS:Don't worry about (...) licence issues. I'm (...) waiting for your package release.
Right...
* One obviously *does* have to worry about licenses - way more than is fun.
* This and other postings here are written such that they can be very easily misunderstood.
* Anything which can be mis-understood in terms of how licenses work and on when and how things can be distributed has already been mis-understood previously. A forum search on such things will not be fun but will bring many such examples. Thus I often comment on postings which can be misunderstood in this manner - both to avoid flame wars and work being wasted.
Yexo wrote:Apologies if we're a bit too careful, but there have been many people that don't get it at all and just redistribute without permission. So when a statement like yours is not completely clear on it's own someone will err on the side of caution and warn you.
A statement I subscribe to fully, too.