Does anyone claim this picture?
-
Well, he just criticized your argumentation. Just because it is free as in beer, means, that you can download it without to pay anything, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t copyrighted.
Actually, many software is freeware, but still not free software. Just because you can dl it for free it doesn’t mean that you can use it as you want. -
Gibbon wrote:
weishaupt wrote:
Gibbon wrote:
FFS. Nice i got dragged into this. It’s a free picture downloadable from herehttp://fantasyartdesign.com/free-wallpapers/digital-art.php?u_i=43&i_i=138
91683 people have downloaded it from just this site alone. No i haven’t asked permission to use it as it’s a free download. End of discussion.
So what you’re saying as I understand it from your own words, is that copyrighted or not, if it’s a free download, then asking permission to use it is completely unnecessary? Awesome, good to know.
You obviously like stirring s*** so i’ll be as simple as possible with the explanation here. I’m not using it for commercial purposes, it’s for private use, therefore i’m not breaking any usage regulations. If i was using it for commercial purposes then yes, things would be different.
On your other point, stop making out i’ve said something when i haven’t, if you can’t understand what i’ve written, get a grownup to explain it you.
No, I understand completely. You said yourself, “No, I haven’t asked permission to use it as it’s a free download”. And right here you say “As long as it’s for non-commercial purposes I’m not breaking any usage regulations.” Therefore, taking one mod’s content to be used in another wouldn’t be against the rules, as the download for every resource used was free, and it’s being used for non-commercial purposes. After all, nobody sells mods. That would be illegal.
-
Umm…
See below!Heheheheh…
-
Copyright
Terms of Use for " Unspecified sci-fi art image "
You may use this image personaly or on your website for recommendation and education purpose only by placing one of the mandatory reference links below. The image cannot be used for any commercial purpose without written consent of the original author. Please contact the artist directly via his/her website in order to obtain a contact information or get any image usage permissions. Email us if you have any other questions.I don’t understand how you guys can print the above Terms of Use and miss the point that the image is freely licensed ONLY by giving credit (through one of the “mandatory reference links” ).
It’s free, sure, but the artist requires that proper credit be given (or ask for permission, as DwnUndr did).
:-?
-
StarTrader wrote:
Umm…naaa….
-
The way I read and fully understand the quote above is that it can be used freely for personal, your website and for educational purposes.
If you intend to use it as a commercial product in advertising then, you need to contact the Artist/s or, person/s that are the rightful owner/s and include the statement/s it contains.
No-one is making money here, that I know of, and as long a credit is given where it belongs, there’s no reason why there should be an argument over it here.
If you feel you should get the proper permission, then do so. Stop crying about it.
I’ll put it this way, if you have a unique logo for you mod cover design, and I want to use it for my desktop background, I’m gonna, permission or not. I’m by no means going to sell it. I’ll use it because I like your work and if someone drops by and ask where I got it, I’ll tell them, I got the from a mod cover that someone made for a game I play called Freelancer or w/e. That’s, that! You’re getting full credit. Word is also getting around abut your talents.
It seems that you guys want to argue all the time about something and debate on who’s right and who’s wrong. Someone asked a question, he got his answer and the subject just goes on and on as to show who knows best and yet all anyone does is copy & paste.
Links to the correct way to find something is much better than quoting something that someone has already posted a dozen times just to make yourself look smart.
There, that’s my opinion about this topic.
I got this on my desktop now for a background image and it was free but it also has an owner. Can you tell me what it is or where it came from? Not you Dwn, you should know already.
-
http://archive.irtc.org/stills/2003-12-31.html check this out it won second place in the internet rat tracing competition
-
Bullwinkle wrote:
Copyright
Terms of Use for " Unspecified sci-fi art image "
You may use this image personaly or on your website for recommendation and education purpose only by placing one of the mandatory reference links below. The image cannot be used for any commercial purpose without written consent of the original author. Please contact the artist directly via his/her website in order to obtain a contact information or get any image usage permissions. Email us if you have any other questions.I don’t understand how you guys can print the above Terms of Use and miss the point that the image is freely licensed ONLY by giving credit (through one of the “mandatory reference links” ).
It’s free, sure, but the artist requires that proper credit be given (or ask for permission, as DwnUndr did).
:-?
Yes, but you see at the heart of all this is the fact that this is a provably and legally certifiable copyright, whereas mods and derivative works cannot be copyrighted in such a manner.
As much as people like to cite it, the Berne Copyright Convention applies to original works, and in fact, does not at all apply to modifications or derivative works of any kind, as the works are built off of someone else’s already copyrighted and protected works.
That being said, since the Berne Copyright Convention does not apply, paperwork must be filed with the government of the country you wish to copyright it in, and even then, since it is, again, a modification/derivative work, it may not even qualify for copyright then.
Since it has most certainly not been filed and certified, as you folks keep citing the Berne Copyright Convention like it actually applies, permission and/or credit is not necessary or required, as the resources are freely available on the internet, and are not being used for commercial purposes and monetary gain. So the use of one mod’s resources in another mod are alright, because they are a) not copyrighted, and b) not being used for monetary gain, as it’s not legal to sell mods.
-
Thats simply not true. If I create a model, or texture, or a sound file from scratch, it has a copyright.
Now if I put it in a game, it doesnt lose it’s copyright. Why would it?I think you need to look up what derivative work means:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work -
Ask Igiss what happens when someone steals his work. :lol:
-
w0dk4 wrote:
Thats simply not true. If I create a model, or texture, or a sound file from scratch, it has a copyright.
Now if I put it in a game, it doesnt lose it’s copyright. Why would it?I think you need to look up what derivative work means:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_workI believe I have repeatedly and frequently stated that original works are copyrighted, and I never once said that it loses its copyright, now did I? I said derivative works as well as modifications. Two seperate definitions that the Berne Convention does not, in fact, apply to. Surely you’re not suggesting that your works are purely original and not a modification to an existing property?
-
Models, textures and sounds, as w0dk4 has pointed out, are in fact 100% original and therefore covered by copyright. The mod as a whole would be considered as a derivative work.
I don’t see why you stick so much on the Berne Convention, though. It’s been superseded many times over (having been created before the Internet was even considered a remote possibility) and many trials have shown that derivative work is in fact within fair use rights, at least in the US and Canada.
Looking at the amount of parodies and other such derivative works in the world, it is pretty clear that a mod, which IS a derivative work, is covered by copyright. The only legally dubious part of FL modding is that the EULA (which is often considered as invalid anyways because it’s not displayed before you buy and run the game) specifically disallows reverse-engineering. Microsoft has however said that it did not mind modding as long as it was non-commercial.
This does not change the facts: the picture referenced to here was in fact free (not free as in beer, free as in speech, libre) for non-commercial works, because the author decided so. Mods may or may not be free in this way, it all depends on the author(s).
-
Just for the copyright thingy… Is that picture not a screen capture of the movie with some image filters applied to it? (I dont want to make the efforts for this image bad - its great, really)
If yes how can this be copyrighted - copyrights can be put on everything but thats not a proof of its validity. At least not if its a screencapture.
-
This is my original work. And so is this.
lol <- this is not, someone else designed/invented it!
Come on boys, pack it in. Please.
We’ve been down this same path so many times - or is it a new School Year?
-
-
rsabatino wrote:
http://archive.irtc.org/stills/2003-12-31.html check this out it won second place in the internet rat tracing competitionHey Richard, thanks for that link and the name of the Artist. I was trying to think of his name but I had Greg Martin in my mind when I posted.
Thanks again.
