Over time there will be more now that penalization was removed.
Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
- Linuxdirk
- Member
- Posts: 3218
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
- In-game: Linuxdirk
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
- rubenwardy
- Moderator
- Posts: 6972
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 18:11
- GitHub: rubenwardy
- IRC: rubenwardy
- In-game: rubenwardy
- Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I don't think that will make much of a difference
If ContentDB gets overrun with proprietary content, I will consider changes to policies then.
Remember that non-free content is naturally penalised by the fact that it doesn't appear in the client, and so will receive less downloads
If ContentDB gets overrun with proprietary content, I will consider changes to policies then.
Remember that non-free content is naturally penalised by the fact that it doesn't appear in the client, and so will receive less downloads
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Thank you.rubenwardy wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 12:01Here's a list of all non-free packages on ContentDB
Code: Select all
name | type --------------------+------ fluffgardian | TXP juanchi | GAME blockmine | GAME brewing | MOD scifi_nodes | MOD (5 rows)
now lets the facts talk:
5 packages out of 792 come with a proprietary license:CDB has 792 packages, with a total of 1502592 downloads.
5 : 792 * 100 = 0.63
That is 0.63% ! In how many years now running the CDB ?
Does not look like the tsunami of proprietary packages rolling
over the CDB, like some people predict.
Will it change now ? I guess not. Most people do not even care
about licensing. They just use what the majority uses. And that
is not proprietary here. Count again in a year or so and we will
see. I say: no significant change will happen.
- Wuzzy
- Member
- Posts: 4786
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 15:01
- GitHub: Wuzzy2
- IRC: Wuzzy
- In-game: Wuzzy
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I have now reviewed the things in question and I have noticed use of share-alike/copylefted media taken from other things, yet the NC clause has unilaterally been added on top of it by the submitter. See ContentDB package comments. This is unacceptable.
Suggestion 1: If people seek to remove non-free content from their things, we should actively support them in finding replacements.
Suggestion 2: Anyone wanting to use -NC or other proprietary license, despite it being incompatible with out community values, this person needs to provide evidence that they're the legal rightsholder or that they have permission from the legal rightsholder. Without evidence, no package approval shall be given. This is to prevent plagiarism and violation of copyleft. It's also to protect ContentDB legally. I do not want to have people suddenly start to sue ContentDB to death because someone uploaded -NC things they were not supposed to upload.
By the way, I see the ContentDB has “Donate” buttons, including on NC content. In some really twisted judge's mind a donation button might be considered a violation of the NonCommercial clause, because something something money. This sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Seriously, read the license text, especially the definition of NonCommercial. Note how vague and broad it is.
In scifi_nodes and brewing, the author seems to be cooperative and actively eliminated (or is eliminating) the non-free media. scifi_nodes is now libre (awesome!), but it still needs a release before it “counts”. Brewing is still a WIP, but the author promised to go full FOSS mode on release. I will believe it when it actually happens. :D
Sidenote: For those who need more reasons why NC is bad for our community, here's someone else who dislikes NC:
https://robmyers.org/2006/11/09/why-the ... esnt-work/
https://robmyers.org/2008/02/24/noncomm ... -copyleft/
Suggestion 1: If people seek to remove non-free content from their things, we should actively support them in finding replacements.
Suggestion 2: Anyone wanting to use -NC or other proprietary license, despite it being incompatible with out community values, this person needs to provide evidence that they're the legal rightsholder or that they have permission from the legal rightsholder. Without evidence, no package approval shall be given. This is to prevent plagiarism and violation of copyleft. It's also to protect ContentDB legally. I do not want to have people suddenly start to sue ContentDB to death because someone uploaded -NC things they were not supposed to upload.
By the way, I see the ContentDB has “Donate” buttons, including on NC content. In some really twisted judge's mind a donation button might be considered a violation of the NonCommercial clause, because something something money. This sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Seriously, read the license text, especially the definition of NonCommercial. Note how vague and broad it is.
In scifi_nodes and brewing, the author seems to be cooperative and actively eliminated (or is eliminating) the non-free media. scifi_nodes is now libre (awesome!), but it still needs a release before it “counts”. Brewing is still a WIP, but the author promised to go full FOSS mode on release. I will believe it when it actually happens. :D
Sidenote: For those who need more reasons why NC is bad for our community, here's someone else who dislikes NC:
https://robmyers.org/2006/11/09/why-the ... esnt-work/
https://robmyers.org/2008/02/24/noncomm ... -copyleft/
- Linuxdirk
- Member
- Posts: 3218
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
- In-game: Linuxdirk
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
The question here is not IF this would happen, the question only is WHEN it will happen.
- FreeGamers
- Member
- Posts: 650
- Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 00:15
- GitHub: is proprietary I use NotABug
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Wuzzy, I checked previous version of scifi_nodes and it mentioned that the sliding door opening sound was the content that was originally listed on freesound.org and under a CC-BY-NC license. The other door sound in scifi_nodes was listed as CC-BY-NC in the mod, but when I followed the link it to the content it was actually CC-BY-3.0. I'm going to go post this information to the maintainer.
I couldn't find this mentioned in the current hosted version of scifi_nodes on ContentDB. I noticed this awhile ago in my game and removed the NC asset and replaced it with a similar sound from FreeDOOM (all free software version of DOOM) of a metal door sliding open. https://github.com/freedoom/freedoom/bl ... sbdopn.wav
As far as I know, that is the last thing in scifi_nodes that is non-free but D00Med can confirm that on his own.
I couldn't find this mentioned in the current hosted version of scifi_nodes on ContentDB. I noticed this awhile ago in my game and removed the NC asset and replaced it with a similar sound from FreeDOOM (all free software version of DOOM) of a metal door sliding open. https://github.com/freedoom/freedoom/bl ... sbdopn.wav
As far as I know, that is the last thing in scifi_nodes that is non-free but D00Med can confirm that on his own.
FreeGamers.org has moved to MeseCraft.net | FreeGamers on this forum is now MeseCraft
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I am the author of Brewing, I think you mean mine, because there's another one about making beer, and it is almost abandoned, I do only fixes. It was my first mod, the code is a mess and a lot of NC media from not trusted sources. I have to search for a replacement, rebirth or something.Wuzzy wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 21:45I have now reviewed the things in question and I have noticed use of share-alike/copylefted media taken from other things, yet the NC clause has unilaterally been added on top of it by the submitter. See ContentDB package comments. This is unacceptable.
Suggestion 1: If people seek to remove non-free content from their things, we should actively support them in finding replacements.
Suggestion 2: Anyone wanting to use -NC or other proprietary license, despite it being incompatible with out community values, this person needs to provide evidence that they're the legal rightsholder or that they have permission from the legal rightsholder. Without evidence, no package approval shall be given. This is to prevent plagiarism and violation of copyleft. It's also to protect ContentDB legally. I do not want to have people suddenly start to sue ContentDB to death because someone uploaded -NC things they were not supposed to upload.
By the way, I see the ContentDB has “Donate” buttons, including on NC content. In some really twisted judge's mind a donation button might be considered a violation of the NonCommercial clause, because something something money. This sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Seriously, read the license text, especially the definition of NonCommercial. Note how vague and broad it is.
In scifi_nodes and brewing, the author seems to be cooperative and actively eliminated (or is eliminating) the non-free media. scifi_nodes is now libre (awesome!), but it still needs a release before it “counts”. Brewing is still a WIP, but the author promised to go full FOSS mode on release. I will believe it when it actually happens. :D
Sidenote: For those who need more reasons why NC is bad for our community, here's someone else who dislikes NC:
https://robmyers.org/2006/11/09/why-the ... esnt-work/
https://robmyers.org/2008/02/24/noncomm ... -copyleft/
So I don't recommend using it. Your computer will not explode, for using it, but it is not recommended. For private use only.
Moreover, there should be a CDB option to hide the mods. So I'd hide it momentarily or for ever.
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I've looked at CDB and mods can't be hidden or removed.
- rubenwardy
- Moderator
- Posts: 6972
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 18:11
- GitHub: rubenwardy
- IRC: rubenwardy
- In-game: rubenwardy
- Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
You need to contact me to remove it, I've done that now
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
There should be a possibility in a person's CDB profile to
remove own packages and to close his account including all
owned packages.
- PolySaken
- Member
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 05:18
- GitHub: PolySaken-I-Am
- In-game: PolySaken
- Location: Wānaka, Aotearoa
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
The general schtick around here is that you have to literally sue someone if you want something that you posted removed. So I doubt that'll happen.
Guidebook Lib, for in-game docs | Poly Decor, some cool blocks | Vision Lib, an all-purpose library.
- Pyrollo
- Developer
- Posts: 385
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 15:14
- GitHub: pyrollo
- In-game: Naj
- Location: Paris
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I was surprised to find scifi_nodes in this list. According to git repo, there is not (anymore?) NC licensed content. Or at least I could not find reference to that clause in license files. It may be a mistake or missing update.
EDIT : Sorry, haven't read FreeGamers post before posting :(
[ Display Modpack ] - [ Digiterms ] - [ Crater MG ] - [ LATE ]
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I wouldn't say that. Even the penalisation of non-free fell. But knowing that it affects only 0.6% of all packages, that
was a cheap sacrifice.
We will see what will happen. As long as this is not clear I will add nothing new there. It costs me time and energy and
I can't even remove it when I would like to.
And just a suggestion: Remove the donation buttons! If you look out for money, find an other way, not from ContentDB.
-
- Member
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
- GitHub: cuthbert
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
you have a point . not really in the spirit of free content when there is a begging button advertised beneath the content.
i have not seen other open source projects display such toxicity towards non free content .
so this must be just a minetest thing.
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz
- LMD
- Member
- Posts: 1386
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 08:16
- GitHub: appgurueu
- IRC: appguru[eu]
- In-game: LMD
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Allow me to use your empirical argument against you: It is common for open source projects to display donate (not "begging" at all) button next to the content. As a prominent example, take the download page of Ubuntu - it mostly is asking for donations, in a far more prominent way than CDB.cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:54you have a point . not really in the spirit of free content when there is a begging button advertised beneath the content.
i have not seen other open source projects display such toxicity towards non free content .
so this must be just a minetest thing.
Furthermore, there are other ways of asking for donations than putting up a subtle button on CDB - either in-game, in-readme, on the website, on the forum post... You can literally put links wherever, and hunting down legit donation links is nothing you'd want the mods to be bothered with. The button is a clean solution. Free is not about free as in free beer, and you don't seem to understanding that.
- rubenwardy
- Moderator
- Posts: 6972
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 18:11
- GitHub: rubenwardy
- IRC: rubenwardy
- In-game: rubenwardy
- Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I added the buttons because it was requested and easy, and because it stops users adding their begging to their actual package meta data
There's currently no way to delete user accounts in bulk, even for me, I'd have to add the ability to do that
There's currently no way to delete user accounts in bulk, even for me, I'd have to add the ability to do that
The forums are different - we've not been given any guidance on how to deal with deletion requests for significant contributors, I'll raise the issue againThe general schtick around here is that you have to literally sue someone if you want something that you posted removed. So I doubt that'll happen.
-
- Member
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
- GitHub: cuthbert
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
there is no such thing as free beer just the recipe, you see there is always a catch .but you were obviously referring to freedom of choice where people are not bullied out of thier rights and forced to comply to ideals
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz
- Linuxdirk
- Member
- Posts: 3218
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
- In-game: Linuxdirk
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Maybe remove the button for non-free content.rubenwardy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:47I added the buttons because it was requested and easy, and because it stops users adding their begging to their actual package meta data
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
That would be nice if it could be added.rubenwardy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:47I added the buttons because it was requested and easy, and because it stops users adding their begging to their actual package meta data
There's currently no way to delete user accounts in bulk, even for me, I'd have to add the ability to do that
How about penalising begging for money in the metadata XD
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I'd like to see that feature, remove/hide mods and accounts. I understand that it may annoy some users, but the control of the creator should take precedence over everything else. In open source it is not a problem at all, there are forks. I mean it should be easy to unsubscribe as well as to register.rubenwardy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:47I added the buttons because it was requested and easy, and because it stops users adding their begging to their actual package meta data
There's currently no way to delete user accounts in bulk, even for me, I'd have to add the ability to do that
The forums are different - we've not been given any guidance on how to deal with deletion requests for significant contributors, I'll raise the issue againThe general schtick around here is that you have to literally sue someone if you want something that you posted removed. So I doubt that'll happen.
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Nobody is bullying you.cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 13:41there is no such thing as free beer just the recipe, you see there is always a catch .but you were obviously referring to freedom of choice where people are not bullied out of thier rights and forced to comply to ideals
And he's right, "Free Software" means freedom, not necessarily zero-cost, though it usually works out to both anyway.
Lead dev of Exile, git repo: https://codeberg.org/Mantar/Exile
-
- Member
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 08:07
- Location: USA
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Even the distributions ask for donations. They even charge for support.
To even think that one is not allowed to cover expenses or earn income while providing "free as in beer, free as in free" software is unreasonable. Please take that mentality to the proprietary software world, and pay to complain.
Thoughts from a "A free as in free and free as in here's yer product have fun!" content contributor!
Donation buttons and charging a fee for proprietary content hosting is more than reasonable, standard, and only helps the community that is providing FREE stuff!
Shad
To even think that one is not allowed to cover expenses or earn income while providing "free as in beer, free as in free" software is unreasonable. Please take that mentality to the proprietary software world, and pay to complain.
Thoughts from a "A free as in free and free as in here's yer product have fun!" content contributor!
Donation buttons and charging a fee for proprietary content hosting is more than reasonable, standard, and only helps the community that is providing FREE stuff!
Shad
-
- Member
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
- GitHub: cuthbert
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
where did i state anyone was bullying me personally? , obviously you have not been paying attention to the hostile preaching in this thread have youMantar wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 19:03no one is bullying you.cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 13:41
there is no such thing as free beer just the recipe, you see there is always a catch .but you were obviously referring to freedom of choice where people are not bullied out of thier rights and forced to comply to ideals
And he's right, "Free Software" means freedom,
and non free content also means freedom of choice for the contributer of that content ,
if you can not except that then simply dont use it ,simple as end of .
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz
- LMD
- Member
- Posts: 1386
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 08:16
- GitHub: appgurueu
- IRC: appguru[eu]
- In-game: LMD
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
"Hostile preaching" ? Saying that this is an exaggeration is an understatement. You are the one not paying attention and simply calling our valid points "bullying" and now "hostile preaching". Those are not arguments, those ar nothing. Keep this discussion objective.cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 20:31where did i state anyone was bullying me personally? , obviously you have not been paying attention to the hostile preaching in this thread have you
Most of us prefer to use free content on a daily basis, except when urged to use nonfree. Many of us are running Linux flavours, for instance.non free content also means freedom of choice for the contributer of that content ,
if you can not except that then simply dont use it ,simple as end of .
Developing and hosting a content database also means freedom of choice for the contributor.
If you can not accept that then simply don't use it. Be grateful that rubenwardy listened to you, because there was absolutely no need for him to.
Last edited by LMD on Tue Jun 02, 2020 08:32, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Member
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
- GitHub: cuthbert
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
while you are free to express your own opinion you can jog on with your ordersLMD wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 21:39Hostile preaching" ? Saying that this is an exaggeration is an understatement. You are the one not paying attention and simply calling our valid points "bullying" and now "hostile preaching". Those are not arguments, those ar nothing. Keep this discussion objective.
"most of us?" i am afraid you are confused you do not speak for the majorityMost of us prefer to not use free content on a daily basis,
i already commended Ruben on his action of bieng fair and just ,so i suggest you quit bieng condecending and pay more attention . now i dont think we have anything further to discuss do we .Be grateful that rubenwardy listened to you, because there was absolutely no need for him to.
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests