YouTube doesn't check for all copyrighted content, only ones it knows about. It's a moderation tool, to save Youtube's skin, passing that filter doesn't make your video ok with copyright. You are still responsible for violating copyrightcuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2020 18:16who issues the copyright strike Youtube . youtube has an autocheck on copyrighted content .so this only applies if you abuse copyrighted content for commercial gain , ie getting paid by youtube ,
Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
- rubenwardy
- Moderator
- Posts: 6978
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 18:11
- GitHub: rubenwardy
- IRC: rubenwardy
- In-game: rubenwardy
- Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Content database for in-menu installer - add your things!
-
- Member
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
- GitHub: cuthbert
Re: Content database for in-menu installer - add your things!
but your are only violating copyright if you use non comercial content for financial gain .rubenwardy wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2020 18:45YouTube doesn't check for all copyrighted content, only ones it knows about. It's a moderation tool, to save Youtube's skin, passing that filter doesn't make your video ok with copyright. You are still responsible for violating copyrightcuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2020 18:16who issues the copyright strike Youtube . youtube has an autocheck on copyrighted content .so this only applies if you abuse copyrighted content for commercial gain , ie getting paid by youtube ,
so all this bull is just a smokescreen to cover up for the rigged competition you have set up on contentdb
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz
- LMD
- Member
- Posts: 1400
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 08:16
- GitHub: appgurueu
- IRC: appguru[eu]
- In-game: LMD
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Content database for in-menu installer - add your things!
You are not listening and barely arguing. You are providing little to no knowledge and arguments in the field. It's pointless to continue the discussion at this point, you're just repeatedly throwing catchy phrases around.cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2020 19:11but your are only violating copyright if you use non comercial content for financial gain .
so all this bull is just a smokescreen to cover up for the rigged competition you have set up on contentdb
I bet you'll now continue to say that this just "undermines" my point and that you were right all along, and that I accordingly have stopped arguing and just "handwave" your points or something... sigh... I'm glad you're not, and will likely never be, the one in charge of ContentDB
Also, when I was calling your stance "bullshit", you were legitimately judging my attitude and dismissing my point. Allow me to do the same.
So at the end of the day, the rule stays :D
- Linuxdirk
- Member
- Posts: 3219
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
- In-game: Linuxdirk
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Content database for in-menu installer - add your things!
Your tin foil hat might be a little too tight.cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2020 19:11so all this bull is just a smokescreen to cover up for the rigged competition you have set up on contentdb
-
- Member
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
- GitHub: cuthbert
Re: Content database for in-menu installer - add your things!
ooh hurty words . how do you feel now you have degenerated to your natural level ?.
did the " rigged competition" comment hit home . shook the foundations of your "religion" alittle there ,an you let your mask slip ?
come on you know full well a rigged competition is not a good public image to display .
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz
- Linuxdirk
- Member
- Posts: 3219
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
- In-game: Linuxdirk
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
*lol* what? Going fully retard now? I have no time dealing with this nonsense. Welcome to my ignore list.
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
You are going offtopic. Personal attacks is not what this thread is about, and is disallowed by forum rules.
Ek59C88tAsaQuRAw6PCPsGFDozj1FuZ4
-
- Member
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 16:03
- GitHub: cuthbert
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
thank you for stepping in to make that point .
if was already drifting off topic with flimsy excuses and poor examples.
it is the content creator who is clearly responsible for what they publish on youtube .
they do not need a nanny from this forum to TELL them anything based on thier unfounded beliefs .. All a smokescreen to deflect from the ...
the main issue of running a rigged competition that misleads the users visiting content DB .
Project BrutalTest...hide your Petz
- 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]
No one's being misled. It very clearly says that nonfree licenses are penalized. The problem is that limiting the exposure of nonfree software serves only to limit the amount of minetest content. There's no good reason to penalize nonfree content other than "hurr durr want free stuff".
Guidebook Lib, for in-game docs | Poly Decor, some cool blocks | Vision Lib, an all-purpose library.
-
- Member
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:58
- GitHub: MoNTE48
- In-game: MoNTE48
- Location: Internet
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I will participate in this offtopic and express my opinion.
As a user, I do not care about all of the above. Given that 90% of the NC mods in the CDB are garbage that has bugs, terrible textures, ugly models, lifelong WIP status. They are made by children who do not know anything in programming, do not know how to draw, and use the images found in 'photo-trash cans'.
And if I see a proprietary, but completely free game that has amazing textures, cool models, flawless work and complete completion, I just download it and enjoy the game! That's all.
As a user, I'm interested in 3 things: price, quality, experience.
As a user, I do not care about all of the above. Given that 90% of the NC mods in the CDB are garbage that has bugs, terrible textures, ugly models, lifelong WIP status. They are made by children who do not know anything in programming, do not know how to draw, and use the images found in 'photo-trash cans'.
And if I see a proprietary, but completely free game that has amazing textures, cool models, flawless work and complete completion, I just download it and enjoy the game! That's all.
As a user, I'm interested in 3 things: price, quality, experience.
- LMD
- Member
- Posts: 1400
- 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]
As an end user probably, but developers, server owners and other content creators are interested in more things & rights...
- LMD
- Member
- Posts: 1400
- 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]
You are repeating yourself. Anything new to contribute to the discussion?cuthbertdoublebarrel wrote: running a rigged competition
-
- Member
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:58
- GitHub: MoNTE48
- In-game: MoNTE48
- Location: Internet
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
OK, I'm not a developer. I am the owner of the server in the first place and the player in the second.
Give an example of a license that prohibits me from running a game on my computer and allowing other players to connect to my computer? Despite the fact that I do not change the code, I do not appropriate authorship and do not distribute the downloaded game in any way.
--- --- ---
So, a proprietary license is:
NOT bad (not-bad != good) for:
* end players (95%)
* server owners (3%)
bad for:
* developers (2%)
---
(The indicated percentages are not true, but show the apparent ratio of developers and players.)
--- --- ---
Let us recognize that everyone has freedom of choice. And we will not try to make the game unfair, by removing the developers of the proprietary code.
If someone wants to prove that free software is better than proprietary, let them open their favorite code editor and do it. I have to prove that the best soccer player is an honest game, not a shot at the feet of my opponents.
Re: Content database for in-menu installer - add your things!
Penalising is wrong. Freedom is also the freedom of choice.rubenwardy wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 16:24Allowing non-free content but penalising it is a compromise in an attempt to please both parties. I would prefer to not have any non-free content whatsoever
Let the people decide and give warnings like the fdroid app store does.
Like red capital letters saying what licenses are used and what that does mean.
Most people, me included, do not know in detail what exactly those licenses
do and what the mean.
To infantilize someone should not be a strategy of the opensource community.
But that is what you do when penalising and moving mods out of the view of players and server owners
- TumeniNodes
- Member
- Posts: 2943
- Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 19:49
- GitHub: TumeniNodes
- IRC: tumeninodes
- In-game: TumeniNodes
- Location: in the dark recesses of the mind
- Contact:
Re: Content database for in-menu installer - add your things!
Well... good thing this isn't a democracy then.
The rules are decided by those who basically "own, run, and maintain" the entire entity known as MineTest.
This isn't a "government" or a "political" venture. And the rules coincide with the overall view of the Free/Open Source community ideology.
The "single person" is a core developer who created the feature (works hard on it too) and other core devs have been able to add their thoughts, as well as other contributors.
So, it has not all been "a single person's decision"
And whether you want to admit it or not, even if we did use a "democratic" approach, you would lose as you are in the minority of the vote.
Most others are in full agreement of the current choice, which is why it wound up the way it currently is.
A Wonderful World
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Looks like everyone is interested in something else. If I started to write down what's important to me, at least ten people disagreed with me even before I started. That's not a bad thing.
I doubt there is rigged competition, just because there is no competition at all in my opinion. If you want cute mobs you can tame and play with, there simply is no other competitor other than petz. Unless you fork it and improve it or make another one that offers the same or more functionality under a more permissive license, I will use petz and my users love it.
My personal agenda says, I'd like free and open source software prioritized over proprietary or worse software. Would I use a very crappy piece of software only because it is open source, while other software packages way better than that are available with the minor drawback that they are not open source? I would use the proprietary one then. You may have a different choice.
If I choose some software or service, I have to make do with what the maker of that software or service provides me. If i release a mod and the content db maintainers say, this thing is crap and doesn't go on content db, then that's their choice and theirs alone, because they make the rules for their service. I am not entitled to force my way into content db.
Same goes for ones software. If one chooses to release it under a restrictive license and still everyone likes, buys/downloads and uses it, it may be crappy as hell and have an evil license on it, but noone is entitled to force me change it.
Did that happen here? No. As far as I understood, runs was interested in making an open source mod. This failed due to license restrictions. People told him. He changed it. Done.
No need shittalking or hating on each other ... ?
Regarding the OP's questions: It's their service and they can do whatever they choose neccessary according to their agenda. Their agenda is to push open source software, so they penalize non-free content. Seems legit. Dividing by 10? They could even divide by 100 or give you a negative rating. You'd still be the only one to provide the petz my players (and I) like.
I doubt there is rigged competition, just because there is no competition at all in my opinion. If you want cute mobs you can tame and play with, there simply is no other competitor other than petz. Unless you fork it and improve it or make another one that offers the same or more functionality under a more permissive license, I will use petz and my users love it.
My personal agenda says, I'd like free and open source software prioritized over proprietary or worse software. Would I use a very crappy piece of software only because it is open source, while other software packages way better than that are available with the minor drawback that they are not open source? I would use the proprietary one then. You may have a different choice.
If I choose some software or service, I have to make do with what the maker of that software or service provides me. If i release a mod and the content db maintainers say, this thing is crap and doesn't go on content db, then that's their choice and theirs alone, because they make the rules for their service. I am not entitled to force my way into content db.
Same goes for ones software. If one chooses to release it under a restrictive license and still everyone likes, buys/downloads and uses it, it may be crappy as hell and have an evil license on it, but noone is entitled to force me change it.
Did that happen here? No. As far as I understood, runs was interested in making an open source mod. This failed due to license restrictions. People told him. He changed it. Done.
No need shittalking or hating on each other ... ?
Regarding the OP's questions: It's their service and they can do whatever they choose neccessary according to their agenda. Their agenda is to push open source software, so they penalize non-free content. Seems legit. Dividing by 10? They could even divide by 100 or give you a negative rating. You'd still be the only one to provide the petz my players (and I) like.
Whatever I say is CC0
- Wuzzy
- Member
- Posts: 4804
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 15:01
- GitHub: Wuzzy2
- IRC: Wuzzy
- In-game: Wuzzy
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Bad example. F-Droid is only for free software. No proprietary software allowed. I like this idea, and this strictness is also very justified, it's a much-needed contrast to the “official” app-stores in which proprietary software absolutely dominates.Penalising is wrong. Freedom is also the freedom of choice.
Let the people decide and give warnings like the fdroid app store does.
Like red capital letters saying what licenses are used and what that does mean.
Most people, me included, do not know in detail what exactly those licenses
do and what the mean.
There are other well-known websites with a strict “free license only” policies, like OpenStreetMap and Wikimedia Commons. Do they make society worse? I don't think so. Strangely, nobody is screaming about “discrimination” on those sites.
I find it hilarious that the proponents of proprietary software, i.e. software that on principle is anti-freedom, complain that we won't treat them equally as free software developers, and they claim foul play. Well, guess what, you're not playing fair either. While you benefit from the free software on this site, you refuse to show the same respect to us. There's nothing wrong if you don't want to make your own contributions, but whining about “foul play” that they don't get the same level of promotion does not make sense. You can't claim the moral high ground on the topic of freedom if you support proprietary software, which is anti-freedom.
I am starting to get tired of this discussion, it's more productive when I go back to work on my games.
-
- Member
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:58
- GitHub: MoNTE48
- In-game: MoNTE48
- Location: Internet
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
I also prefer to return to their work. Only small clarification:
I do not whine, I do not use Content DB, I do my part in open source software as much as I want.
Wuzzy, how can the OpenStreetMap (in which you declassified your location) overlap with proprietary software? Except that OpenStreetMap is used by proprietary software! (I use PROPRIETARY navigation app, based on OSM.)
Wikimedia Commons is kind of useless to me. Although I regularly donate to the Wikipedia fund. I can’t say anything about this.
Non-free software is not anti-freedom. You contradict yourself, claiming that I contradict myself. True freedom - this applies to everyone equally and let everyone do what he wants. Until the rights of another person are violated. As long as my non-free software does not violate your rights, any suggestions to limit the availability of my software are a violation of my freedoms.
If Minetest is a free engine, it should welcome all contributors. Otherwise, please create official rules for communicating on the forum and posting on the CDB with an indication of the list of licenses approved for use. Your choice is CC-NC and GNU GPLv2 (without +)! And let me take advantage of my free and delete my account from here.
I do not whine, I do not use Content DB, I do my part in open source software as much as I want.
Wuzzy, how can the OpenStreetMap (in which you declassified your location) overlap with proprietary software? Except that OpenStreetMap is used by proprietary software! (I use PROPRIETARY navigation app, based on OSM.)
Wikimedia Commons is kind of useless to me. Although I regularly donate to the Wikipedia fund. I can’t say anything about this.
Non-free software is not anti-freedom. You contradict yourself, claiming that I contradict myself. True freedom - this applies to everyone equally and let everyone do what he wants. Until the rights of another person are violated. As long as my non-free software does not violate your rights, any suggestions to limit the availability of my software are a violation of my freedoms.
If Minetest is a free engine, it should welcome all contributors. Otherwise, please create official rules for communicating on the forum and posting on the CDB with an indication of the list of licenses approved for use. Your choice is CC-NC and GNU GPLv2 (without +)! And let me take advantage of my free and delete my account from here.
- 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]
Exactly.MoNTE48 wrote: ↑Sat May 23, 2020 21:26True freedom - this applies to everyone equally and let everyone do what he wants. Until the rights of another person are violated. As long as my non-free software does not violate your rights, any suggestions to limit the availability of my software are a violation of my freedoms.
Guidebook Lib, for in-game docs | Poly Decor, some cool blocks | Vision Lib, an all-purpose library.
-
- Member
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 13:12
- GitHub: oilboi
- IRC: oilboi
- In-game: oilboi
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
Why would you want non-free software in an open source game? The whole reason this engine exists is because it is open. If it was non-free there would be no way to even make this complaint because it would not exist. I don't even know how non-free content exists in the game engine to be honest with you. Even if it does, why would you want it to be locked down so others cannot make improvements to the existing data/code and overall create a better game/mod/model/texture/sound/song/etc?
This account is no longer active
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
In my language there is a term for this: byzantine discussions. In Byzantium there was a discussion about the sex of angels. In other words, bullshit discussions that don't lead to anything. Meanwhile the Ottomans at the gates of Constantinople. They ended up falling.
You have to look at history to see the truth. Minecraft and Hytale are the real enemies...
Work to make Minetest better every day, runs dixit.
You have to look at history to see the truth. Minecraft and Hytale are the real enemies...
Work to make Minetest better every day, runs dixit.
- 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]
Because it doesn't affect the content that is already free, but it still adds to the total amount of content. Also nonfree content tends to be of higher quality because people are scared to put effort into work that anyone can use.Oil_boi wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2020 00:45Why would you want non-free software in an open source game? The whole reason this engine exists is because it is open. If it was non-free there would be no way to even make this complaint because it would not exist. I don't even know how non-free content exists in the game engine to be honest with you. Even if it does, why would you want it to be locked down so others cannot make improvements to the existing data/code and overall create a better game/mod/model/texture/sound/song/etc?
Guidebook Lib, for in-game docs | Poly Decor, some cool blocks | Vision Lib, an all-purpose library.
-
- Member
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 13:12
- GitHub: oilboi
- IRC: oilboi
- In-game: oilboi
- Contact:
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
WhatPolySaken wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2020 01:45Because it doesn't affect the content that is already free, but it still adds to the total amount of content. Also nonfree content tends to be of higher quality because people are scared to put effort into work that anyone can use.Oil_boi wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2020 00:45Why would you want non-free software in an open source game? The whole reason this engine exists is because it is open. If it was non-free there would be no way to even make this complaint because it would not exist. I don't even know how non-free content exists in the game engine to be honest with you. Even if it does, why would you want it to be locked down so others cannot make improvements to the existing data/code and overall create a better game/mod/model/texture/sound/song/etc?
This account is no longer active
- 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]
You asked why we would want non-free content, I gave an answer.
More nonfree content does not equal less free content.
Guidebook Lib, for in-game docs | Poly Decor, some cool blocks | Vision Lib, an all-purpose library.
Re: Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]
You are wrong.Wuzzy wrote: ↑Sat May 23, 2020 19:58Bad example. F-Droid is only for free software. No proprietary software allowed. I like this idea, and this strictness is also very justified, it's a much-needed contrast to the “official” app-stores in which proprietary software absolutely dominates.Penalising is wrong. Freedom is also the freedom of choice.
Let the people decide and give warnings like the fdroid app store does.
Like red capital letters saying what licenses are used and what that does mean.
Most people, me included, do not know in detail what exactly those licenses
do and what the mean.
Just one example:
osmand navigation app
https://f-droid.org/de/packages/net.osmand.plus/
read the deocumentation and about antifeatures:
Antifeature:NonFreeAssets
This Antifeature is applied to apps that contain and make use of non-free assets.
The most common case is apps using artwork - images, sounds, music, etc - under a non-commercial license.
Antifeature:NonFreeNet
This Antifeature is applied to apps that promote or depend entirely on a non-Free network service.
While this is a rather vague definition, the following might give some sort of guidance: [...]
Antifeature:NonFreeAdd
This Antifeature is applied to apps that, although Free Software themselves, promote other non-Free applications or plugins.
The Petz mod had been penelized for using nonfree media. Not for using nonfree code.
Penelizing is antifreedom and infantilizing people.
Why does it work on fdroid with simple warnings while in ContentDB you get penelized ?
My mods do neither use closed source code nor media, I am speaking in general.
Penelizing is not freedom and will lead to some people not using that ContentDB.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests