OpenUru.org

I'd tend to agree with the CC license as a starting point with maybe the ND being a personal choice.

There's still an unanswered question, I think, where an age uses assets released under FCAL...

IMO only the final built data should be covered with the CC license -- CC isn't really appropriate for the source files. This way, it's the final product that's CC'd and not any Cyan assets that may (or may not) be used in the process. The ND variant of CC should prevent there from being viral CC-ness by stripping assets out of the built age.

Seems perfectly reasonable. I think it's the possible virality of the licensing on a source asset that might be a concern. In the first instance, it means there's probably a duty on the age creator to ensure that the assets they use, if not of their own creation, are not adversely burdened.

I've gotten a response from rustee about including Vothol Gallery:

Hi Doobes. Yes, please do whatever you like.
Rusty

Short, sweet and to the point. I like it.

Still waiting to hear back from Lontahv. I'm sure Tweek will be OK with Fehnir House being added, but I'll double check. Plus, if we're lucky, he may have a new version for us sometime soon.

In order to keep everyone informed, I discussed where we're at with JW and Rarified tonight so I can make this post.

There are a few technical hurdles remaining to getting content onto Minkata, and then we have some process hurdles to getting content onto MOULa. (at least.) The technical hurdles should fall pretty soon and we can get content onto Minkata on "verbal" authorization and begin testing.

That won't be enough to get content to MOULa. For MOULa, we need Cyan to shortlist some licenses they'll accept, and we need content creators to formally license their content (as discussed above). We do not have to invent a new wheel here, there are other publishers and modder communities we can emulate. For everyone's protection, We Gotta Do This. Maybe the shortest path is for Doobes to attach a license to the Messengers Pub, and we ask Cyan "Will this be OK?"

Note: If any content contains material from Cyan (as-is or derived) then additional contortions are required; the content creator is going to need to talk to Cyan. OU could maybe facilitate that discussion if the creator can be forthcoming about exactly what content was re-used. Not sure if this applies to any of the first batch of content. As long as the creator sticks to these guidelines from RAWA, things should go well.

That's what it'll take to get the first content into MOULa. Long term there's more to do for sustainability - tasks like automation, making boilerplate/template license agreements, writing layman's guides to content licensing and to packaging up and submitting your content. We don't need that now though... not for round one.

While fan shards may not really require licenses for the ages they use, we have to remember that Cyan, as a commercial enterprise, will need to cover their asses a bit. They may not actually require a license per se, but I fully expect they'll want something that declares that some due diligence has been performed by the contributor and a license is often the easy way to deal with that, especially if a suitable one is available off-the-shelf.

For fan content licences, a good starting point has to the Creative Commons licenses as suggested by Hoikas on the previous page. If nothing in the underlying sources conflicts with that (which the creator should check) then I can't see it giving Cyan a problem. They're ready-made, straightforward and so don't give the content creator any great work to do.

I still think there's a bit of an unknown where some of the assets are Cyan's and used under FCAL (and possibly not all FCALs are equal). While I don't see Cyan really having a problem with that (per the RAWA guidelines that Marten mentions), I'm not sure of the "virality" of FCALs - there may be a need to tweak them slightly.

Of course, I'm considering all of the above in the context of fan ages - for less complex items (I'm loathe to say "trivial", because it may sound insulting, but you know what I mean) like clothing items, Cyan may consider the risk to be low enough that they'll accept those with a declaration of "this is all my own work" as they have done with a couple of items recently.

Again, the key word here is simplify. We want whatever document used to be easy to fill out so as not to put off the average Age builder...

...so basically, the exact opposite of US tax forms.

Mac_Fife wrote: ↑Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:14 pm (I'm loathe to say "trivial", because it may sound insulting, but you know what I mean)

"Smaller scale", perhaps?

Mod note: Split implementation discussion to a new thread - viewtopic.php?f=108&t=975&p=9083#p9077