I've added another texture, which is my original work and you don't have to worry about a 3rd party texture (which is still fine, but you may not wanna dig for it's licensing status). Enjoy :)
@FabinhoSC thanks :) I think the link makes this font legit PD because it provides a clear statement by the author himself and the PD dedication also has a fallback license in case PD can't be achieved, similarly to CC0. I personally still only use fonts under CC0, because that's the standard, most used PD waiver written by lawyers and recommended by such organizations as the FSF, other waivers have a higher probability of having a "bug". I'll try to message the author of Tuffy if he'd be willing to stick CC0 to it.
+1 for CC0, great description and sources of your art, and for using a libre font.
I only use PD fonts too now -- not many people care about using libre fonts, but I do think it's important -- even if laws now may allow you to use non-free fonts, they may change any time so it's better to take the safe way. I like to see you take this way.
Although Tuffy is libre, it seems to be unclear about what license it really uses, on font pages I found it marked as PD/GPL/OFL. True and safest PD art, even fonts, should come clearly marked as CC0 by the author. There are basically only a handful of such vector fonts I know of:
Personally I hate OFL, I see it as almost non-free because of the "don't sell this" condition, it's really a borderline proprietary license. A font being under OFL is an instant no go for me.
Especially with tiny pixel art and pixel fonts I think you could hardly ever claim copyright for this font, there have been thousands of pixel art fonts of this small resolution by now, so yours would likely be considered a derivative work of some of them, and in some countries these font are not even copyrightable, so licensing very likely makes no sense. I'd personally use CC0.
IANAL but people claiming your work as their own has nothing to do with licensing, they simply can't do that. Even if it's public domain, you could sue them for falsely claiming authorship -- I don't think publicly lying like this for the purpose of e.g. business is legal.
I personally only use CC0 fonts, such as Aileron, because I can simply use them, and I share everything back under CC0 too. I also proudly credit the author (dot colon for Aileron) exactly because he's not forcing me to credit him. I think that itself deserves a credit.
So CC0 is just a little idea from me for how you could avoid the PITA.
@Baŝto No, I just created this small mockup and colored it, but it would be a nice little project to color the whole post. You can do it if you want, it's public domain!
@pixel32 It warms my heart to hear your words, I completely agree :)
Hats off, this is a beautiful and completely professional work. I admire it. Thank you for enriching the public domain :)
I've added another texture, which is my original work and you don't have to worry about a 3rd party texture (which is still fine, but you may not wanna dig for it's licensing status). Enjoy :)
@FabinhoSC thanks :) I think the link makes this font legit PD because it provides a clear statement by the author himself and the PD dedication also has a fallback license in case PD can't be achieved, similarly to CC0. I personally still only use fonts under CC0, because that's the standard, most used PD waiver written by lawyers and recommended by such organizations as the FSF, other waivers have a higher probability of having a "bug". I'll try to message the author of Tuffy if he'd be willing to stick CC0 to it.
Immediately favorited :) I knew this had to be your work, Cethiel, just from seeing the images.
Nice contribution, thank you :)
+1 for CC0, great description and sources of your art, and for using a libre font.
I only use PD fonts too now -- not many people care about using libre fonts, but I do think it's important -- even if laws now may allow you to use non-free fonts, they may change any time so it's better to take the safe way. I like to see you take this way.
Although Tuffy is libre, it seems to be unclear about what license it really uses, on font pages I found it marked as PD/GPL/OFL. True and safest PD art, even fonts, should come clearly marked as CC0 by the author. There are basically only a handful of such vector fonts I know of:
- dotcolon fonts: http://dotcolon.net/, I mostly use Aileron
- Mr Henry: https://github.com/nickdaze/mr-henry
Just a few tips. You made a really good first contribution, keep it up :)
Personally I hate OFL, I see it as almost non-free because of the "don't sell this" condition, it's really a borderline proprietary license. A font being under OFL is an instant no go for me.
Especially with tiny pixel art and pixel fonts I think you could hardly ever claim copyright for this font, there have been thousands of pixel art fonts of this small resolution by now, so yours would likely be considered a derivative work of some of them, and in some countries these font are not even copyrightable, so licensing very likely makes no sense. I'd personally use CC0.
IANAL but people claiming your work as their own has nothing to do with licensing, they simply can't do that. Even if it's public domain, you could sue them for falsely claiming authorship -- I don't think publicly lying like this for the purpose of e.g. business is legal.
I personally only use CC0 fonts, such as Aileron, because I can simply use them, and I share everything back under CC0 too. I also proudly credit the author (dot colon for Aileron) exactly because he's not forcing me to credit him. I think that itself deserves a credit.
So CC0 is just a little idea from me for how you could avoid the PITA.
Love and Peace :)
These are now in my Xonotic map :)
I've now added 640x480 upscaled versions, enjoy!
@Baŝto No, I just created this small mockup and colored it, but it would be a nice little project to color the whole post. You can do it if you want, it's public domain!
@pixel32 It warms my heart to hear your words, I completely agree :)
I am totally loving this style, thanks for sharing your art.
Did you really mean to dual license this? Because CC-BY is redundant when you also choose CC0 -- just CC0 would be enough in this case.
Pages