29 réponses à ce sujet

[The Amethyst Dragon]

Greetings, my fellow contributors to the Custom Content Challenge.

 

Over the years, a couple of folks have requested that contents of the CCC be included in the CEP.  Since I am now working on said hak compilation, I figure I need to get the ball rolling with a general request for permission status.

 

If you have made any contributions to the CCC and would like to possibly have your creation(s) added to the CEP, please respond in this thread.  Permission from a few of us (myself, _six, JFK/Frith5) was given a couple years ago (on the old CEP forum, then copied over to the current CEP forum), but I'd like to hear from anyone that wants to give permission.  I'm only really looking for "yes" responses, since I'll assume silence means "not giving permission" or "isn't around to give permission".

 

Feel free to qualify your yes if you want, such as "yes, but only for my x entry and y entry", or "yes, for any entry before August 2012", or whatever.

 

A yes is no guarantee your content gets added, just that it will eventually end up in a poll for the community to vote on inclusion.

 

 

[Carcerian]

You got my OK here

 

(Personally speaking, any content I have posted on the IGN's nwvault, NeverwinterVault.org, or Bioware social pages, including my CCC entries can be considered open-source/public domain. While i appreciate credit, all i ask is that if others base new works upon mine, is to share freely with the community when possible, so that others may enjoy too. Should CEP find any useful, i would certainly consider it's inclusion an honor.)

[Proleric]

I'm very happy for CEP to use my stuff, but I don't think you need my permission. The CCC submissions to Neverwintervault.org are "Open - Free & open only if project also open". The submissions to NWVault place no restriction on "reasonable and customary forms of re-use" under the site rules.

I know this was controversial back in the day, but the way the community operates now is that restricted content has to be explicitly labelled as such. This is a very practical issue for me, as I'm using thousands of custom objects on the understanding that they're open content.

[Pstemarie]

Anything I make is open for insertion into CEP. It'll be harder to blend in because I use Q as the basis for it, but feel free. I also need to talk with you about giving the community something its been drooling over for some time. PM me when you're out and about.

 

Since I'm not one for BS, I'll just blurt it out - I'm interested, in the best interest of keeping the game vibrant, in merging Project Q with CEP. I've sent TAD a PM and if he accepts, that means the Revived CEP Team will have TWO official members equally devoted to the game and willing to do whatever it takes to keep it and CEP alive. 

[Rolo Kipp]

<happy as a wizard...> 

 

Yes.

*clears throat*

Ah-hem....

YES! =)

 

<...with a wish>

[MerricksDad]

Anything I ever made, feel free to run with it in any direction you want

[Rolo Kipp]

<trying to pick...>

 

I do have a personal request related to CEP permissions, however.

When I first started developing Forester, I dove in with both feet and one particularly scrumptious model featured prominently from CEP.

Later I discovered it was IP ripped from WoW. Which set me back considerably, and, in fact, contributed to the back-burner status of my first major mod.

 

Quite simply, I will not tie my mod to content that might at any moment be pulled with a cease and desist order from a company *known* to zealously guard it's IP. Which meant I abandoned CEP completely.

 

I do request that whatever else you do, you remove assets that are identifiably proprietary IP.

 

I *really* want this resource.

 

<...the fly out of the ointment>

[cervantes35]

Anything I have done , can do or maybe done in the future is free for anyone to use with no restrictions so if you want to modify it have fun i hope you enjoy it as I have.

[ShadowM]

I'm very happy for CEP to use my stuff, but I don't think you need my permission. The CCC submissions to Neverwintervault.org are "Open - Free & open only if project also open". The submissions to NWVault place no restriction on "reasonable and customary forms of re-use" under the site rules.

I know this was controversial back in the day, but the way the community operates now is that restricted content has to be explicitly labelled as such. This is a very practical issue for me, as I'm using thousands of custom objects on the understanding that they're open content.

Basically what he said

[Zarathustra217]

Naturally, yes.

[Mecheon]

Go nuts if you actually want to use it

 

Still needing to redo that oni one day...

[phenix-rising]

Yes for anything I have done.

[Estelindis]

Anything I've made myself, that isn't a conversion from another game, may be used by anyone however they wish.  That's all my CCC stuff, since none of that was converted.

[OldTimeRadio]

Any of my work can be used by anyone for any reason, including limited-release testing material.  The only caveat I'd give is look over the (appearances) closely.  In some of my submissions, only a portion of a given submission may be useful for a wider audience.  Your call.

 

Rolo, I completely understand your stance on the WoW model but I just want to toss in a different opinion and if you or anyone else is similarly hesitant or on the fence, maybe this will help allay concerns.  In 2006, a mod for Half-Life 2 called Garry's Mod was created and released.  It allowed people to create enormous sandbox worlds using the game's engine.  Almost immediately, people began porting models from other games to use in it.  This has been going on for eight years now.  It was (and still is) wildly popular.  In fact, It's the sixth most popular game in the entirety of Steam with 47,000 unique players having logged in so far, today.  And those same ported models (player models, placeables, levels, etc.) can be found for download, even on the Steam Workshop page for the mod.  Including models ported from Blizzard and many other games, especially from larger franchises. 

 

In light of this reality, and I encourage people to go to that link and see for themselves, I find it implausible that Blizzard would deliver a C&D to a mod for a (relatively old and dead) game such as CEP for NWN, especially one containing a single model of theirs.

 

I understand that most of us march to different drummers and most of us march with a lot of steam in each stride.  I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on a particular point, simply adding a counterpoint opinion and what facts I've used to come to that opinion.

[KlatchainCoffee]

To reflect what Rolo and OTR said about IP use.

 

I had spent a good 10+ years as a moderator on an arts website that faced similar problems - do we allow fan art (because people like doing it and it can be very creative) or do we disallow it for greater emphasis on original art and (mainly) for fear of someone deciding to be nasty about their IP with the end result of the plug being pulled on the whole website in a worst case scenario.

 

The solution was a compromise: Fan Art was allowed, but could only be published as in its own structurally separate area of the website, to make any IP-related worst case scenario less apocalyptic.

 

Considering this already seems to be going the modular hak way, perhaps such content could be put in its own separate hak, for people to have the option to include it or not in their work. Whether this should contain ALL stuff imported from other games (including nwn2 ??) or just the high-risk IP entities (e.g. Blizzard and other big brands) is a different question. 

 

All I know is that, personally, I would strongly prefer NOT to use any WoW content in anything I build in NWN, but, on the other hand, would not have as much of a problem if it's stuff from the games under the 'Bioware' umbrella.

[Birdman076]

Use any of my meager offerings how you see fit. I wish I had more time to help and create.

[henesua]

I have done next to nil in this arena but anything I have done for NWN is fair to use.

[Proleric]

Going forward, I'm sure we want all new content in CEP to be open licensed, with author attribution by model, and no commercial IP issues.

Given that backward compatibility is a key goal, perhaps existing material of doubtful provenance could be so labelled in the description, as a warning to unwary builders - or is that just inviting trouble?

Alternatively, for legacy content only, we could take a tip from YouTube, by declining to discuss the matter with anyone other than the alleged IP owner.

[Zarathustra217]

I agree to the concerns regarding using IP content - while the risk of any form of legal action might be minimal, it would be a massive amount of work for module builders to remove any entries that point to content that later had to be removed. We could release it as a separate hak, but that would just be more work on the already burdened shoulders of TAD (and others involved).

 

My own two cents is that it's not worth it.

[MerricksDad]

I agree to the concerns regarding using IP content - while the risk of any form of legal action might be minimal, it would be a massive amount of work for module builders to remove any entries that point to content that later had to be removed. We could release it as a separate hak, but that would just be more work on the already burdened shoulders of TAD (and others involved).

 

My own two cents is that it's not worth it.

 

If the need ever arises, we can always take any of the existing bioware file format scripts (including my own) and have them parse any module and remove references to the offending model, or insert the reference to another model. It would never be that big of a deal.

[Zarathustra217]

I imagine a lot of IP models wouldn't have suitable replacements - and even when they do, dimensions would differ, requiring realignment of objects etc. Also, there's the issue of having to spend time assessing what to replace each specific model with - and I imagine there could be many different opinions about that.


I'd say that could easily turn out to be a bit of a deal.

[Rolo Kipp]

<channeling his...>

 

In the interest of completeness, Cestus Dei also grants the same permissions that I do :-)

 

Naturally :-)

 

<...inner dwarf>

[Vibrant Penumbra]

Does stumpy and grumpy know you're throwing perms around like cotton candy, cute and cantankerous? 

 

At least you're smart enough not to speak for me, old man. 

 

But, yes, Big Purple, Tu casa es mi casa 

Take anything you want, do anything you want and expect me when I've already slipped back into shadow...

[Rolo Kipp]

<sniffing gingerly...>

 

Of course he does!

Or will, when he comes to.

He's been hobnobbing with orcs on some kind of "research" for this month's Idols and Totems. Apparently that bug juice of theirs packs a lot bigger kick than he expected.

 

He looks so cute nestled in the arms of that matriarch, too... with all the war paint in such odd places...

 

<...at a big, primitive mug>

[Grymlorde]

I'm very happy for CEP to use my stuff, but I don't think you need my permission. The CCC submissions to Neverwintervault.org are "Open - Free & open only if project also open". The submissions to NWVault place no restriction on "reasonable and customary forms of re-use" under the site rules.

I know this was controversial back in the day, but the way the community operates now is that restricted content has to be explicitly labelled as such. This is a very practical issue for me, as I'm using thousands of custom objects on the understanding that they're open content.

 

I was part of that controversy back in the day. And my stance hasn't changed -- please feel free to use anything I've posted in a public forum for non-commercial purposes so long I receive credit.