Leaving ContentDB

[TenPlus1]

Preface:

ContentDB was and still is a great way to showcase mods and make it easier for players to download the mods they like within the Minetest client itself. I just wish it was as easy to use for the mod creators who upload them.

Issue:

Mods provided are scrutinized by CDB admin which usually end up with the author having to jumping through hoops to make changes, media licenses which although provided aren't free enough to be hosted on the site, that make us hound media creators for a license that doesn't exist. Isn't permission given license enough to use it ?

Conclusion:

I'm sorry to say that I've closed my ContentDB account and my mods will no longer be listed under the Content tab for players of Minetest. Instead anyone who still wishes to use them will have to go to my git page to download and install them manually. I am sorry.

Git Page:

https://notabug.org/TenPlus1

[debiankaios]

You can set up a own contentdb as i remember. You can change the contentdb-url to your own contentdb-url in minetest. Maybe yours let more freedom then the original. But if we have 5 contentdbs on end, that would be a bit strange.

[LMD]

Mods provided are scrutinized by CDB admin which usually end up with the author having to jumping through hoops to make changes, media licenses which although provided aren't free enough to be hosted on the site, that make us hound media creators for a license that doesn't exist. Isn't permission given license enough to use it ?

Licensing issues are not to be taken lightly. "Permission given" needs to be made legally sound by picking a proper license.

[runs]

TenPlus1, please do not abandon ContentDB. Talk things over with the right people first, before being so blunt. Everything has a solution, except death.

I didn't know about the importance of licenses until I found Minetest. Thanks to it I know how important it is. And now I use free licenses (I mean OS licenses).

In fact, personally I was almost sued by an important company, with lawyer and all, for uploading things, unconsciously, out of ignorance, and I was very upset. It was a nightmare for me. Because of it, I still don't sleep peacefully at night.

As you have been told, these things should not be taken lightly.

[ROllerozxa]

ContentDB editor here. I was the one who did a quick audit of TenPlus1's mods yesterday, which in itself was caused by another modder bringing up TenPlus1's use of unlicensed assets as an excuse for their own mod.

Mods provided are scrutinized by CDB admin which usually end up with the author having to jumping through hoops to make changes, media licenses which although provided aren't free enough to be hosted on the site, that make us hound media creators for a license that doesn't exist. Isn't permission given license enough to use it ?

All content on ContentDB is required to be free (by 'free', I mean free as in freedom per the Free Software Definition), which means being put under a free license (albeit with special case for nonfree CC -NC licenses). What TenPlus1 has done with some of his assets is either taken them from Minecraft, Minecraft mods, other unlicensed assets from various sites, or obtained assets from others who have done this.

Taking unlicensed content and putting it up on ContentDB is not allowed, even if attribution is given. Neither is copyrighted content not under a free license. This is neglectful (not to mention illegal in most cases), and as such it is something we as ContentDB editors enforce in order to ensure the Minetest mod ecosystem is stable and healthy. Alongside proactively working to prevent legal action from a certain proprietary block game by taking down packages that contain assets sourced from there, which probably goes without saying.

In most other modding communities, copyright is usually something ignored until a DMCA is filed or a lawsuit happens, copyrighted content is used left and right without any second thought, and even certain mod authors are hostile to the rest of the community (e.g. how in the ETS2 modding scene, a certain modding group strong-armed the game's developers into letting their mods be protected using the game's in-house archiving format to prevent anyone from inspecting and modifying them).

Looking more broadly, the maps, textures, sounds and whatnot, that get created by people in general who do not put them under a free license turn into digital junk when they eventually move on. Making use of them becomes legally questionable, you might be able to contact them somehow or take the risk and use it anyways. But copyright trolls also exist, DMCAing your projects into oblivion because you had no legal ground to stand on when using their copyrighted material. (Side note but gigabytes of old Minecraft texture packs are in a legal limbo abandoned by their author who might be fine with it being used in Minetest or might not be, while Pixel Perfection, a rare texture pack that is under a properly free license, is able to be used in Minetest and has also become the default textures for MineClone)

This is something we do not want to happen in the Minetest ecosystem, and as such we take a very strong stance that everything on ContentDB needs to be freely licensed. It mirrors the licensing of the engine itself, which was made free software by celeron55 allowing it to become what it is today despite his little involvement today, it allows for e.g. schools and other organisations to safely make use of Minetest, and allows packages to be safely forked and further developed if the original maintainer has moved on from Minetest.

[runs]

Tenplus, the same thing happened to me with my first mods, Petz and Juanchi Game. I got locked out of ContentDB until I fixed things. And today I'm thankful for it.

And that's why I created The Samz. A game where I created everything (except the sounds) from scratch. Even the color palette.

I don't want a law firm to sue me. It was a very traumatic experience for me.

[MisterE]

Isn't permission given license enough to use it ?

Definately not. You, as a content creator legally MUST use properly licensed media and code. If someone gives you permission to use something then YOU and only you have any certian right to use it. In other words, everyone who downloads the mod may not have a legal right to use it. Copyright defaults to ”all rights reserved” unless specifically written otherwise in a license. It is your responsibility to properly license your mods, and it is sad to see such a well known and respected mod author shirking that responsibility.

[TenPlus1]

@MisterE - I don't shirk responsibility in the slightest, I have permission to use and distribute media in my mods but CDB requires it to be under a license heading every time rather than permission freely given. It would have been better if they would allow a download link for us to host our own downloads so they can avoid legal responsibility themselves.

[MisterE]

If you have permission, then you need a license to prove that permission. You have permission to distribute the media, but do others? Can other people download the mod and then put it in their game and then distribute their game? Without a proper license, the answer is 'no'.

[MisterE]

permission freely given is not a license, and is unenforcable. If permisson is freely given, then the rights holder should release under CC0 or CC-BY-SA 4.0. if the rights holder neglects to provide an enforcable license, then the media is not free, and anyone who does not have direct personal permission from the rights holder has no rights.

[MisterE]

@MisterE - I don't shirk responsibility in the slightest, I have permission to use and distribute media in my mods but CDB requires it to be under a license heading every time rather than permission freely given. It would have been better if they would allow a download link for us to host our own downloads so they can avoid legal responsibility themselves.

You have permission, but no one else does. CDB rules are not just there to protect cdb, but also all its users. You are not doing any of your users a favor by providing them a mod that is not properly licensed.

[runs]

My idea is:
- Switching to Minetest compliant licenses takes time, don't despair and set a reasonable deadline.
- Seek licenses from their original creators. It is difficult but not impossible. Ask them to specify which standard license they are equivalent to.
- Your mods are used by a lot of players and servers. So ask them for help, I'm sure there are artists among them. And if nobody helps you, they don't deserve the effort you make, send them directly to hell.
- Create a platform, a message in this forum would help you to replace that which is problematic. Make a list of things and cross them off.
- https://freesound.org/ and Audacity is your friend for sounds. Even if an audio doesn't fit, you can cut and take the part that interests you and modify it.
- This is the year of AI for graphics. Your assistants will be able to get their hands on more interesting things.

What you can't do is give up. That said, many games and players depend on your mods. They don't know how to download from Github. Don't let them down.

[Fixer]

Really sorry to hear this, I've enjoyed those mods over the years, I don't think it is good to leave CDB...

[TenPlus1]

@runs - I wish the first two were possible, I get permissions to use certain media for that particular mod and to distribute that mod, but admin tend to pull the mod itself from downloads until things are cleared which means I have to either try to contact creators to add a license instead of the agreed upon one, or re-create a texture because it looks too similiar to a minecraft one. This has been going on for weeks now which gets stressfull, and just when you think you've finally sorted everything, earlier today I had 12 messages about mod license issues alone.

@Fixer - Sorry dude, if CBD enabled a 3rd party download link so I could take the onus for license issues that would be better. Pulling my mods and receiving multiple messages don't help in my day to day, minetest is suppose to be fun.

[AwesomeDragon97]

I can help with recreating textures if you can provide a list of textures that have licensing issues.

[TenPlus1]

@AwesomeDragon97 - Many thanks, player submissions are more than welcome but even then CDB admin have issues with that. The latest texture problems were Farming Redo's coffee textures (even though I have permission to use them), also Sushi and Melon.

[ROllerozxa]

The latest texture problems were Farming Redo's coffee textures (even though I have permission to use them)

Those textures were from the Industrial Craft 2 Minecraft mod, which has this license:

Spoiler

Everything seen on this website/thread and directly related to the content of this post is copyrighted by the respective author of this mod (IC² Dev-Team).

Any sort of files associated with this content (= the Download) may only be used for it's actual purpose (installing and playing IC²).

You may modify any or all of the content, but are NOT allowed to public any of it.

As well, nobody besides the author and persons elected by the author are allowed to provide any download links.

Everyone else is NOT allowed to public any sort of download, though he/she may hand out links to this website/thread instead.

Especially it is EXPLICITLY NOT allowed for anyone besides the author to earn any money by using this content's existence.

This includes adf.ly, site advertisement and donations.

All sites refers to any downloads hosted via the IC² wiki associated with and/or hosted by any member of the IC² Dev-Team are allowed to provide content and/or links to content freely.

Any individuum is allowed to showcase this mod in form of screenshots and/or videos on any platform/website/forum under following restriction:*A link to this thread must be provided, clearly visible under/next-to the media element(s).

You cannot take textures from wherever you like, and assume that just giving attribution is enough to make it legal. Likewise, when asking for permission from authors, just a "pinky promise" from them is not enough, they need to license it under a free license if they haven't already and you will then specify that in the license file. User submissions are fine, and making use of assets that aren't your own is fine, but you as the mod author are responsible to make sure these assets are freely licensed. Just because you've been able to get away with this for so long does not make things any different. In addition:

or re-create a texture because it looks too similiar to a minecraft one.

This is extremely dishonest considering you have been caught several times with copied Minecraft assets. Not "too similar", but copied verbatim with the same colour patterns and pixel shape. (albeit with minor alterations... trying to trip up hash checks?) For the Minecraft texture copyright violations that have been discovered during my tenure as a CDB editor, I would verify by checking the textures side-by-side in GIMP. If it really was just similar I would have noticed, otherwise if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and hugs like a duck then it is a duck, not just similar.

[AwesomeDragon97]

I made some watermelon textures that you can use that are CC-BY-SA-3.0.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/ro9sc6tv ... s.zip/file

[MisterE]

minetest is suppose to be fun.

Legal action against someone is definitely not fun. CDB's policies prevent this unfun situation from happening. If you don't follow those policies, then you open yourself and anyone who uses your work to legal action against you and them. If you show that you do not care about the legality of your media, then people who use your mods in their projects (such as Mesecraft, many servers, etc) will have to be extra careful to check all the media to make sure that it is legitimately licensed.

If minetest is supposed to be fun, then do things right the first time so that none of us have to go thru this awful headache. If you opt out of it, then that leaves a huge headache for the rest of us. Basically, make sure to only use textures that you know have a compatible license, or make them yourself. Make contributors license their contributions under the same license for simplicity's sake. Licensing is not that hard if you do it right, but even if it is hard, the "most fun" thing is to get it right so no one has to deal with a legal takedown notice, fines, or a court case. Any of those could happen at any time to anyone who is using illegally-gotten media, and it really does happen. Especially since, reportedly, some of your textures come from Minecraft, which has a competitive interest in defending its intellectual property.

People should be grateful that CDB admins spend their unpaid free time working to check everyone's mods to make sure they are licensed legally. They are doing you and everyone else a service by trying to protect us all from legal action.

[runs]

I believe that everyone makes mistakes, often unconsciously or through ignorance, the important thing is to correct them.

So if the problem is 12 textures, or 24, that can be corrected.

Anyway the licensing issue is not clear, I had and I have many doubts. The administrators should create a clear and instructive infographic about it. What types of licenses are there, what is and what is not allowed in Minetets. I mean, in a clear and understandable way for the layman.

[runs]

A long time ago I told here that there were some textures in the web that had a restrictive license and it turns out that this person "stole" them from another. It turns out that the admins of the site were screaming to high heaven if someone used them incorrectly. Until I put a post exposing the case of my investigation, and they told me that well, that... ahem... what were they going to say? These textures supposedly had a "legal" author, but in reality he was not.

So sometimes the obvious is not so obvious. Especially with Minecraft texture mods.

The best thing to do is to create it yourself or to know THE ORIGIN emphatically.

[MisterE]

Yes. With only a little time, you can learn to do passable pixel art. Then, just be open to others coming by to improve it with a PR.

[Blockhead]

Take the time you need to sort things out Tenplus1, and come back when/if you're ready. Your mods are quite good and enjoyable. We just have to be very careful to respect copyright law as pointed out. I'm sure it was disheartening to see a bunch of notifications when you logged into ContentDB for the day and it seems a lot to deal with all at once. It's probably too much to do all at once and that's okay. Bit by bit though, you can and should chip away at addressing these issues, so that your mods can have a wide reach again as provided by publishing in ContentDB.

[Festus1965]

TenPlus1
I always take your content from the source,
and as long that links I store in the mod init.lua itself does not change ... I will do.

I have to say thanks for good work, as example low impact mods family

and have no problem toi do so in future, I don't miss ContentDB as near never using.

[ShadMOrdre]

Just asking....

To whom do I attribute with AI created graphics, when those AI graphics are being built using a dataset that is "questionably" licensed? Do we think that we can trace the owners of those images? Reubenwardy pointed to the AI that was able to create Minetest code. To whom do we properly, legally attribute for the single line of code that registers a node. To celeron55, the dev that helped with the Lua API, the first modder, reubenwardys mod book?

I guarantee that those datasets were built using Googles image database, and all content from Sourceforge, GitThis, GitThat, and all other FOSS compliant projects, regardless of host.

So where is the line drawn in regards to having to supply the "chain" of custody licenses. How far back does one need to attribute? Obviously, to the original. So where is the proper attribution for AI created content, who gets the attribution, and can you guarantee the even the MASS of Minecraft content was not included in the AI created image, so as to avoid the legal tangle?

This gets really comlex, for a "hobbyist, community driven, in our spare time, hoping to capture some of the fame of the Other game..." FOSS project. Some would argue that because MT itself is licenced LGPL v2.1, and that all content created for such a licensed project, would require that ALL available content be licensed the same. This excludes all other FOSS compatible licenses that are not LGPLv2.1. Why? Derivative work! It is derivative in that it simply wouldn't be created for MT, if there were no MT.

This will probably draw scrutiny for my gal mod. Please, point out the licensing issues. I'm sure there are some. But, then, plantlife, moretrees, cool trees, moreplants, Farlands, valleys, valleys_c, ethereal, default, and many others should draw the same scrutiny, since that is where the bulk of gals' content originates.

And wondering, is code on CDB getting the same level of scrutiny, since reviewing code is FAR more work involved that viewing an image?


Shad