take_this_cup_of_poison wrote:WWWWWWRONG!!!!
As per US case law the artist owns that which he creates in the program and can do with it as he likes. If he has violated the license agreement between the company who owns the application or not has no bearing on third parties or who or how the artist decides to use or donate his work.

PLEASE stop spreading the "all your rights are belong to owner of program" myth. PLEASE learn a thing or two about IP law before giving "advice".

You are wrong sir, the artist cannot do as he pleases with the work he has done in a 'non-commercial' application. However, this now isn't the case so there is no need to talk about the textures.

Oh, btw, I never mentioned anything about "all your rights are belong to owner of program" myth". I haven't implied that, never said that, and would never mean that. You read WAY into the lines on the forums.

BE CAREFUL. ALL WHO HAVE THE SOLDIER PK3 DELETE IT!!!!!! IT WILL PREVENT NEXUIZ FROM OPENING SOMEHOW.

Code: Select all

Archive:  soldier.pk3
  Length     Date   Time    Name
--------    ----   ----    ----
        0  10-18-08 21:55   models/
        0  10-19-08 01:14   models/player/
  1823692  10-19-08 01:13   models/player/soldier.zym
  1049115  10-18-08 22:30   models/player/soldier.tga
      107  10-19-08 02:29   models/player/soldier.txt
        0  10-18-08 21:56   scripts/
      167  10-18-08 22:37   scripts/visor.shader
        0  10-18-08 23:24   textures/
   193699  10-18-08 22:35   textures/soldier_gloss.jpg
    56589  10-18-08 22:35   textures/soldier.jpg
    15356  10-18-08 22:36   textures/visor.jpg
    86861  10-18-08 22:36   textures/soldier_shirt.jpg
      686  10-18-08 22:36   textures/visor_gloss.jpg
   229997  10-18-08 22:36   textures/soldier_pants.jpg
   494880  10-18-08 22:39   textures/soldier_norm.jpg
        1  10-19-08 02:29   soldier
      866  10-18-08 22:08   readme.txt


Instead of accusing this playermodel to broke your installation, remove your others stupid pk3 you got from unclear sources.

You do NOT know what you are talking about, AI.

That which the artist makes in the program he owns and can distribute however he wishes and sublicense however he wishes without ill harm coming to the recipients and subsequent licensees.

If the artist violates the agreement he has with the software vender by licensing the works in this way that has no bearing on the ownership nor the licensing of the work. It only has bearing on weather the artist may continue using the software and if he will incur penalties from using it in a way the software vender and he did not agree on.

The artist sill owns his work.
The licensees of his work still keep their license.
The only thing that might happen is that the _artist_ gets in trouble with the software vender.

You don't know what you're talking about.
You know nothing of IP law as it stands through statute and (more importantly) caselaw.

ai wrote:

take_this_cup_of_poison wrote:WWWWWWRONG!!!!
As per US case law the artist owns that which he creates in the program and can do with it as he likes. If he has violated the license agreement between the company who owns the application or not has no bearing on third parties or who or how the artist decides to use or donate his work.

PLEASE stop spreading the "all your rights are belong to owner of program" myth. PLEASE learn a thing or two about IP law before giving "advice".

You are wrong sir, the artist cannot do as he pleases with the work he has done in a 'non-commercial' application. However, this now isn't the case so there is no need to talk about the textures.

Oh, btw, I never mentioned anything about "all your rights are belong to owner of program" myth". I haven't implied that, never said that, and would never mean that. You read WAY into the lines on the forums.

take_this_cup_of_poison wrote:The artist sill owns his work.
The licensees of his work still keep their license.
The only thing that might happen is that the _artist_ gets in trouble with the software vender.

Never disagreed with that.

take_this_cup_of_poison wrote:You don't know what you're talking about.
You know nothing of IP law as it stands through statute and (more importantly) caselaw

Yes I do.

And on other notes. If you create works with non-commercial software you CANNOT do as you please with that work. You CANNOT sell it, you CANNOT make money of it. You STILL own that work, you STILL have copyright on that work NOT the vendor or any other party. I do know what I'm talking about.

Do you (sarcasm just in case you wouldn't figure that out)?

Oh just leave it.

Rad Ished wrote:Oh just leave it.

No no, this is fun

ai wrote:And on other notes. If you create works with non-commercial software you CANNOT do as you please with that work. You CANNOT sell it, you CANNOT make money of it. You STILL own that work, you STILL have copyright on that work NOT the vendor or any other party. I do know what I'm talking about.

And exactly that is wrong.

You sure CAN sell it, and the act of selling constitutes nothing illegal. However, your USE of the software then was illegal, and you can be sued for that.

In other words: YOU have the sole copyright, the EULA of the software cannot lead to the company who made the software having a copyright on the works YOU made with that software (any such terms are void). And you can use your works in any way you wish. The only thing that can happen is that you violate the license of the software which you have used, which is between you and the copyright holders of the software, and does not affect anyone else (especially not people you have given the content to).

Three examples:

• You download the "free for non-commercial use" version of Terragen.
• You make some skyboxes for a game that is under the GPL, like Nexuiz.

This sure is commercial use, and gets you a lawsuit by the authors of Terragen. However, as YOU own the copyright on the skybox and not THEM, they can only sue YOU, but not US (or anyone who distributes Nexuiz).

• You download the "free for non-commercial use" version of Terragen.
• You make some skyboxes for your own maps, which are distributed as PD or using a noncommercial license.
• We later(!) ask you if we can use your skyboxes.
• You agree. We put the skyboxes under the GPL.

Here, the software was NOT used for commercial purposes. The key part is that you did NOT make the skyboxes with the intention of getting them into Nexuiz, but just for your own map (noncommercial and PD clearly both negate any commercial interest). Everything is legal here, neither you nor us can get sued successfully.

• You download the "free for non-commercial use" version of Terragen.
• You make some skyboxes.
• You give the skyboxes to us and say "they're PD, do what you want with them".

You can get sued again, as you obviously made the skyboxes with the intention of getting in the game, and that IS commercial use.

Distinguishing between the latter two cases would be up to a court, of course, so even the "legal" variant can get you into trouble, especially if you cannot prove that you did make the skybox with non-commercial interests in mind. If you published them the day before they got committed in Nexuiz, it is quite likely that the court will see that you were trying to "mask" this as noncommercial... but with a large timely distance it would be safe.

BTW: I do not recommend ANY artist to actually go that route and publish skyboxes made with terragen with a license without the non-commercial term, even as PD. Even though it is legal, it can easily get you into trouble, and a court may rule that it was commercial use even if it was not. Courts are not perfect, and wrong decisions happen, so do not try to mess with them. Even winning such a case can cost you quite much money, for example you may still have to pay your lawyers.

divVerent wrote:You sure CAN sell it, and the act of selling constitutes nothing illegal. However, your USE of the software then was illegal, and you can be sued for that.

In other words: YOU have the sole copyright, the EULA of the software cannot lead to the company who made the software having a copyright on the works YOU made with that software (any such terms are void). And you can use your works in any way you wish. The only thing that can happen is that you violate the license of the software which you have used, which is between you and the copyright holders of the software, and does not affect anyone else (especially not people you have given the content to).

Yeah, this is actually what I meant. Just figured people would pick up on it, without having to go into the details. As I know you guys already know this, even better than me.

But thanks for those two latter examples I didn't know about that. Not that I would ever use a non-commercial application for anything GPL:ed or other stuff that was clearly or possibly breaking the EULA.

You can use terragened images under gpl and donate them to nexuiz project. Free for non commercial use allows to use them anywhere, unless you gain some financial benefit. Unless alientrap starts to pay morphed for his models (directly or undirectly), he can use the software as he likes.

You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. The exchange of the Work for other copyrighted works by means of digital file-sharing or otherwise shall not be considered to be intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation, provided there is no payment of any monetary compensation in connection with the exchange of copyrighted works.

As you can see, this case is not primarily intended.

Well, we do take donations, and that can be constructed as commercial use. Happened to others before, even a single ad banner that the WEB HOSTER placed (on which you have no influence) may cause a court to rule that this is commercial use.

Indeed. It does not have to be you who is making money.

The GPL requires no discrimination on fields of endeavour, including commercial use. To avoid legal issues, it's probably a good idea to seek legal advice. The SFLC might be able to help here.

Only a thought - sometimes things can be solved by just asking kindly. If it is not about GPLing products of terragen in general but rather one or two specific images generated with it, it might be worth a shot to just contact them and ask. In exchange for mentioning the software in the readme or similar they might grant the user that created the images the right to publish such specific images under the GPL.

This should of course be done in writing and naming the creator of the images and including the images as attachments of course. This would be a one-case solution only and will not help others that produce something with the software, but still.

I don't think they will include a general passage that says "Publishing under GPL is ok if it is for Nexuiz" in their EULA though, even with their name on the Nexuiz website :o)

halogene wrote:I don't think they will include a general passage that says "Publishing under GPL is ok if it is for Nexuiz" in their EULA though

Even if they did, it'd be a meaningless statement since the GPL is a non-exclusive license.

No. It depends on the actual license text. Non-commercial use is not world wide accepted term and should be defined in the license. Currently investigation is going on how creative commons non commercial use should be regarded in various contexts. As I said, terragened images CAN BE licensed as gpl. EULA license applies to the user, not for the product. This means: you (or your organization) can't use terragen to make money or any other gain which would be defined by them as COMMERCIAL USE.

For your curiosity:

Code: Select all

b.   Non-Commercial Use Restriction.  The software may only be used for non-commercial use, except as provided below.  “Non-commercial use” may include the following: teaching, academic research, public demonstrations, and personal experimentation. 

Without limiting the above restriction, this software, permitted modifications or programs you create using this software, may not be used for commercial purposes.  Examples of commercial purposes would be running business operations, licensing, leasing, or selling the software, distributing the software for use with commercial products, using the software in the creation or use of commercial products or any other activity which purpose is to procure a commercial gain to you or others.  Commercial purposes do not include a limited one-time internal evaluation of the software. For such purposes, you may not use the software in a live operating environment or for longer than sixty (60) days unless Microsoft permits you to do so under a separate commercial license.


This is Microsoft Non-Commercial use license.

Interesting case is that Microsoft defines how end-user creation should be licensed:

Without limiting the above restriction, this software, permitted modifications or programs you create using this software, may not be used for commercial purposes.