Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

User avatar
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]

by Linuxdirk » Post

rubenwardy wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 12:01
Here's a list of all non-free packages on ContentDB
Over time there will be more now that penalization was removed.

User avatar
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]

by rubenwardy » Post

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
Renewed Tab (my browser add-on) | Donate | Mods | Minetest Modding Book

Hello profile reader

u18398

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by u18398 » Post

rubenwardy wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 12:01
Here'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)
 
Thank you.

now lets the facts talk:
CDB has 792 packages, with a total of 1502592 downloads.
5 packages out of 792 come with a proprietary license:
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.

User avatar
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]

by Wuzzy » Post

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/

User avatar
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]

by Linuxdirk » Post

Wuzzy wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 21:45
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 …
The question here is not IF this would happen, the question only is WHEN it will happen.

User avatar
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]

by FreeGamers » Post

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.
FreeGamers.org has moved to MeseCraft.net | FreeGamers on this forum is now MeseCraft

User avatar
runs
Member
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 08:32

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by runs » Post

Wuzzy wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 21:45
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/
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.

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.

User avatar
runs
Member
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 08:32

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by runs » Post

I've looked at CDB and mods can't be hidden or removed.

User avatar
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]

by rubenwardy » Post

runs wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 00:10
I've looked at CDB and mods can't be hidden or removed.
You need to contact me to remove it, I've done that now
Renewed Tab (my browser add-on) | Donate | Mods | Minetest Modding Book

Hello profile reader

u18398

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by u18398 » Post

rubenwardy wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 01:44
runs wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 00:10
I've looked at CDB and mods can't be hidden or removed.
You need to contact me to remove it, I've done that now
There should be a possibility in a person's CDB profile to
remove own packages and to close his account including all
owned packages.

User avatar
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]

by PolySaken » Post

Gundul wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 07:29
There should be a possibility in a person's CDB profile to
remove own packages and to close his account including all
owned packages.
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.

User avatar
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]

by Pyrollo » Post

rubenwardy wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 12:01

Code: Select all

 scifi_nodes        | MOD
 
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 ]

u18398

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by u18398 » Post

PolySaken wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 08:51
Gundul wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 07:29
There should be a possibility in a person's CDB profile to
remove own packages and to close his account including all
owned packages.
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.
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.

cuthbertdoublebarrel
Member
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
GitHub: cuthbert

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by cuthbertdoublebarrel » Post

Gundul wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:24
And just a suggestion: Remove the donation buttons! If you look out for money, find an other way, not from ContentDB.
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

User avatar
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]

by LMD » Post

cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:54
Gundul wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:24
And just a suggestion: Remove the donation buttons! If you look out for money, find an other way, not from ContentDB.
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.
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.

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.
My stuff: Projects - Mods - Website

User avatar
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]

by rubenwardy » Post

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
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.
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 again
Renewed Tab (my browser add-on) | Donate | Mods | Minetest Modding Book

Hello profile reader

cuthbertdoublebarrel
Member
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
GitHub: cuthbert

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by cuthbertdoublebarrel » Post

LMD wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:01
free is not about free as in free beer, and you don't seem to understanding that.
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

User avatar
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]

by Linuxdirk » Post

rubenwardy wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:47
I added the buttons because it was requested and easy, and because it stops users adding their begging to their actual package meta data
Maybe remove the button for non-free content.

u18398

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by u18398 » Post

rubenwardy wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:47
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
That would be nice if it could be added.

How about penalising begging for money in the metadata XD

User avatar
runs
Member
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 08:32

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by runs » Post

rubenwardy wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:47
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
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.
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 again
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.

User avatar
Mantar
Member
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2017 18:46
Contact:

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by Mantar » Post

cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 13:41
LMD wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:01
free is not about free as in free beer, and you don't seem to understanding that.
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
Nobody is bullying you.
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

ShadMOrdre
Member
Posts: 1118
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 08:07
Location: USA

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by ShadMOrdre » Post

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

cuthbertdoublebarrel
Member
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
GitHub: cuthbert

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by cuthbertdoublebarrel » Post

Mantar wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 19:03
cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 13:41
LMD wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:01
free is not about free as in free beer, and you don't seem to understanding that.

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
no one is bullying you.
where did i state anyone was bullying me personally? , obviously you have not been paying attention to the hostile preaching in this thread have you
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

User avatar
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]

by LMD » Post

cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 20:31
where did i state anyone was bullying me personally? , obviously you have not been paying attention to the hostile preaching in this thread have you
"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.
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 .
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.

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.
My stuff: Projects - Mods - Website

cuthbertdoublebarrel
Member
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
GitHub: cuthbert

Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

by cuthbertdoublebarrel » Post

LMD wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 21:39
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.
while you are free to express your own opinion you can jog on with your orders
Most of us prefer to not use free content on a daily basis,
"most of us?" i am afraid you are confused you do not speak for the majority
Be grateful that rubenwardy listened to you, because there was absolutely no need for him to.
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 .
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests