Share-alike/DRM-free requirements filter

[IoriBranford]

Here's an idea to address the ambiguity of what exactly the "ShareAlike" and "No additional restrictions" of CC-BY and CC-BY-SA apply to.

The legally safe default would be

• Share-alike: "Nothing" for assets with CC0, CC-BY, or OGA-BY; "Entire projects" otherwise
• No additional restriction: "Nothing" for assets with CC0 or OGA-BY; "Entire projects" otherwise

The middle option would mean you only have to release the sprites and any derivatives under the same CC license, say on OpenGameArt. To fill out which assets fit into the middle option, we would have to ask each CC artist if this is acceptable to them.

[Gaurav0]

"No Additional Restriction" is pretty vague. Can we reword?

[IoriBranford]

It's the CC-BY and CC-BY-SA's own words, I guess to cover any and all forms of restricting access. Maybe the options can be more descriptive, like this.

Share-alike:

• No requirement
• Share-alike this sprite
• Share-alike your entire project that uses this sprite

Additional restrictions* are:

• Allowed
• Allowed if this sprite available without restriction somewhere
• Not allowed on any project that uses this sprite

* Tooltip: Such as Terms of Use, an End User License Agreement, or a Digital Rights Management system.

[jrconway3]

The DRM commentary is debatable anyway. At a basic reading, it only seems to apply to the assets specifically, not the entire project. As long as the assets are publicly available online, there's probably no harm in releasing a project on Steam or iOS featuring such assets.

I plan to honor it because a lot of people believe that's what it means, but personally I don't think that's what it actually means. (Bluecarrot has expressed similar thoughts on it, too).

[Gaurav0]

Re: the controversy, I've stated the situation as below on the README.

Generally, while I would like to agree with you, @jrconway3 , a person planning to sell their game on Steam or iOS App Store might want to wait until this issue is litigated in an actual court of law.

It is unclear whether this means you cannot release your game on platforms like Steam and the App Store on iOS which use encryption to DRM protect your game. It could be enough to make the assets easily available separately for download, but the DRM clause does not clearly state this. It could be enough to make a DRM free version available to those who purchase the game on these platforms, but again, the DRM clause does not clearly state this. To be safe from any potential legal issues, I would recommend you use CC0 and/or OGA-BY assets only if you intend to publish on such platforms. The OGA-BY license removes the DRM clause for precisely this reason.

[jrconway3]

As I said, its just my opinion based on the reading, but I plan to honor the common opinion of the matter. Which is why I don't really intend on using assets that are straight CC assets as a result.

[IoriBranford]

For what it's worth, the CC FAQ claims this.

However, if you upload that same file to your own site or any other site that does not apply DRM to the file, and a listener chooses to stream it through an app that applies DRM, you have not violated the license.

If true, this seems most in line with the spirit of CC licensing. After all, the used and modified material is available shared-alike and DRM-free, which CC was intended to protect. But as they say, not legal advice.

I for one am willing to take this chance on my own project, but only with a small number of assets that can be replaced relatively easily if need be.

[jrconway3]

Honestly I don't see a need for it. Just having a licensing filter is enough IMO. A license filter covers this already and this just adds extra unneeded options.

[Gaurav0]

I kind of agree. The explanation of each of the licenses probably belongs in the README, not in the generator.

[IoriBranford]

But users now have to go and read through the licenses and the readme. I think it can only help to be as upfront as possible about legal risks and obligations that the user might take on.
What about listing the obligations of each license, with explanatory tooltips plus links to the readme footnote:

[Gaurav0]

There's a lot more to a license than just "Share-alike" and "No DRM". But I'd consider a PR that adds tooltips and links to the license in the README.