Reply With Quote
Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal may apply...
it is because lawyers and legislators are trying to anticipate the holes and this is not always easy as I just learned. It's not possible to cover everything but we can always amend it later.
Reading a new law usually consist in modifications of other laws. Such as : replace the word here by that word at these places. It's really hard to understand what the document is about if you don't have an idea of the broad picture.
I was more or less serious about the Supreme council since it was the name of the Soviet legislature. But since other countries also use it (including democracies) , I don't see a problem with that name anymore.
Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal may apply...
A vote is in order. Personally I expressed my opinion (I'm an advocate of CC-BY) earlier but it's not a popular one.Originally Posted by Azelor
If I'm understanding correctly, all the proposed rules mean that the project can not use anything CC.
That is a good point I didn't think of that. You can still use CC I think, just not anything with a SA, ND or NC, which rules out a lot of stuff I imagine.
I just looked at the CC licenses again and they really do not seem to suit our needs. These are some of our needs as I can see it right now: The ability to share and use material freely within the project. The ability to protect the project from theft. Maintaining the option to be able to develop as a commercial enterprise if desired at a later date. Ensuring participants are properly compensated and attributed.
CC licenses don't really cover a group project that well, they would also restrict our ability to commercialize it later on, and they wouldn't have great allowance to to protection from theft. Most importantly it would also lock most of our material in a system from which we would not reasonably be able to alter the terms of the copyright.
We are still open to improve the current license.
Some people juggle geese. I'm just sayin'.
Bryan Ray, visual effects artist
http://www.bryanray.name
Unless someone disagree, I will submit the actual license to a vote in a couple of hours. 7 days of voting should be more than enough.
-Contributor: to be considered a contributor, people need to submit at least one contribution.
-Contributors of the project can use, modify and publish material that they own. If they do publish, they just need to inform the community.
-Everyone can use, modify the material of the project for personal or artistic purposes. They can share their derivative work as long as they have the approval of the original author. But they cannot use the content for commercial purposes.
Council: Decisions concerning general aspects of the material are the privilege of the Council members. Including: legal matters, the license, general direction of the project, approval of commercial projects.
To become a council member, people need to submit at least one contribution and they need to sign in on a list
- The site administrators of the Cartographer's Guild are also part of the Council since they are maintaining this space.
- In extraordinary circumstances, council members can be denied of their privileges if 2/3 of the council members vote against them. But they always keep their rights on their work.
- It is possible to amend the license with the support of 2/3 of the council members.
- The council members take decisions by voting. The vote is made public to ensure that only council members votes are counted.
- Votes concerning legal matters should last a full month to let the active council members sufficient time to vote. A normal vote is won with 50%+1 of the votes cast at the end of the voting period.
*Votes concerning non legal matters such as the description of different world elements and general opinion are open to every member of the Guild. The voting period should be around 3 or 4 days. Usually, a simple majority is required to win.
Once something enters the project, either an image or a full-fledged idea, it become part of the project. If the content is, for some reason rejected, it can't be used in the project or any derivative work on it without the consent of the author. The material used in the project should respect copyrights. You can't have material that is non commercial unless you have the approval of the author to do so.
Campaign setting: The main goal of the project is too create a campaign setting and to be able to publish it. Example of campaign settings: List of campaign settings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
To do that, we need the contributors to agree (it’s mandatory) that their work could be used in a publication, including a commercial publication. The profits would be distributed equally to all contributors that have material in the publication. At this stage, we are not if this will happen but we need to ask before people commit to the project, otherwise it will become impossible to contact everyone.
To publish a project: the first step is to submit the project to the community. Even if the person is publishing her own work, the community need to be informed. In that case, it's just a formality. When the project includes more than one author, a vote is usually required. After the project is submitted, the concerned authors will need to express their approval or disapproval of the project. There are no time limit for the authors the express themselves, refusal or simply a lack of answer means it can't be published as it’s only possible to publish content to which the authors agreed.
Every publication needs the approval of its original author(s).
Last edited by Azélor; 02-28-2015 at 09:58 AM.
I've done a number of illustrations, character descriptions and a couple of story hooks now.
I want to be able to publish my works as Free Culture works (CC4.0-BY: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) elsewhere but also in here as part of CWBP.
I'm uncertain how to proceed.
I am not sure either but just wanted to chip in and say that unless the image of the character is so specific to the description in the CWBP2 then at the very least you could describe your image and some of the write up in your CC-BY license and say its not part of CWBP2 but people can use it for that reason if they see fit. But yeah - I have always been concerned about this bizarre licensing.
Is it related to this thread ? http://www.cartographersguild.com/sh...015#post261015
Since Ghostman already agreed, I think it's alright.
