Best practices for attribution
Published on
This article has moved!
A more updated version has now moved to the Pepper&Carrot documentation wiki:
https://www.peppercarrot.com/en/documentation/120_License_best_practices.html
16 comments
Role-Playing-Games and Board-Games
the simulated cover was great and i definitel would want to play it
oh My GOD!
https://www.peppercarrot.com/data/images/faq/2017-03_good-practise-attributions/2017-03_goodpractise_ccby_08_object.jpg
this need to be real!
but instead of plain black text, an imprinted one should be better (not sure if that is the term)
i guess The effect can be simulated with displacement map or bump map.
this picture of peper is so beautyfull
https://www.peppercarrot.com/data/images/faq/2017-03_good-practise-attributions/2017-03_goodpractise_ccby_03_relicensing.jpg
so destructive, an sepia would fit better, i hope no one do derivative works like that xD
Where you write "behind the box" (in the section about board games) you probably want "back of the box". The French language strikes again!
Thank you :3 fixed!
Thank you Igor! Ha true, bumped characters are probably better for plastic objects/toys. The little 3D low-poly *.blend file "Carrot in a bucket" is here: https://github.com/Deevad/peppercarrot_game-gfx
Oh yeah....;
I am OK (as a poor mentor) to all your attributes... and your CS4 was the "minimum"
J'écris en français (désolé) mais t'assure toujours "violent" sans parler de l'équipe qui envoie de la 3D du sud-ouest (envoyer les gaillards ;)
Hey David, this is a really good page and I bet it will inspire people to create some interesting things too.
The last two are a little odd though. Copyright only applies to the form of an idea, not to ideas themselves. So you could say "Based on Pepper&Carrot by David Revoy" but if you add the CC-By part, it confuses the ideas of the world and comic with the copyright of the original works you create. Fan works (that are not derived) don't have a copyright link with the original works, but should credit you for I think moral rights or trademarks.
IANAL, please check with Creative Commons, Software Freedom Law Center or your local friendly copyright lawyer.
Merci ;-) !
Thank you! Interesting; sure, I'll do my best to keep editing this article and refining it for pure best practise. But here I treat fan-art and fan-fiction as derivative project. I don't think a particular 'fair' rule should apply on them. This is something the industry of proprietary license invented to not sue all the core fans of a franchise , imo. ( a blury zone, because they can still sue at any time ).
To clarify, I think what Martin is asking/saying is: how do you provide attribute for the original work without without confusing the end user to think the license applies to the new derivative portion of the work (and the work as a whole)?
i tried but i'm not an artist and dont know how to do that xD
Ha this (thanks). In this case, maybe it's good to write a long attribution explaining all in details as the example of : "A derivation Copyrighted by MyNameHere of "Artwork title linked to the original page" by David Revoy originally licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. Change made: Blue cat is better, added a pencil. "
I seems I found a small typo:
"... collecting funds exclusively for my <MyNameHere> on the production ... "
Should it be the word "work" right after "<MyNameHere>"? ^__^
Ha thank you for the proof reading Konstantin, fixed!
хммм
That's a little long, I think. Maybe just adding the license to the fan art / any other works of derivation itself will clear up the confusion, like:
"Fan art of Pepper" by <insertmyname>, <insertfanartlicensehere>
based on Pepper&Carrot by D.Revoy, CC-By
That sounds good. 👍
Post a reply
The comments on this article are archived and unfortunately not yet connected to a dedicated post on Mastodon. Feel free to continue the discussion on the social media of your choice. Link to this post:You can also quote my account so I'll get a notification.
(eg. @davidrevoy@framapiaf.org on my Mastodon profile.)