New Portraits/Small Pics!

[manikus]

The GPL doesn't really apply to graphics, I mean how could you show the source code? There are other licenses, but all licenses are really just codified agreements of use. So, the DC Uatu license () is a picture may only be modified if a black background is replaced with another. All else is not allowed. [Some stuff about not being able to claim as your own, not make money off of Uatu's work without his explicit permission, etc. and/or whatever]

Okay, I'm looking at the nupperibo and I like the addtion of the background, but (I know, "what do you mean but?") because the background is brighter it seems like the bluish shadow along the belly on the lower right hand side, seems it should be darker. (That's all, I promise.) It must be some trick of the color combo.

[Uatu]

Yeah - interesting effect (actually, there is no blue (the darkest shade is gray), but it LOOKS blue because of the reddish background now)... To undo it, I would have to use a new palette for the "little guy," but - that is too much work, so I will just leave it as is!

An alternative solution might be to "lessen" the reddishness of the background (make only a bit of red show) to lessen the contrast.

(I might have to add something to the Uatu license that states something like "making money is only allowed if you also give gobs of money to Uatu"... )

[manikus]

I think you should leave the nup' as is.

As per your license, I almost added that in, the bit about the gobs of money. In the DC manikus license, I know that the money clause will certainly be there.

[Uatu]

Yes - might be better to bold "gobs"...

Okay, the nup stays as is then (Yay, the Devils Three can now have a partaaay! (The nature of which is everyone bullying the nupperibo, of course ("Kill 'im again, Glasya!")...))

[manikus]

...not only kill "him", but you know who has to clean-up in the morning...

[Uatu]

...if he remembers, that is (IQ of about 10 or so, I'd say?)

[manikus]

If he doesn't remember, she can always kill him again and tell the next to clean up.

[Uatu]

Ha ha... Poor blobby nupperibos...

[SilentThief]

Of course, any artist that makes a general use license might have thier rights thrown out.

check this thread:
http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/...ad.php?t=98978


ST

[manikus]

Actually, this is the whole reason to have a license or copyright statement. If we (the artists) clearly state who can do what, then we are legally protected, even if someone tries to use our art as orphaned art. These are good things to think about and talk about.
We all need to post a clear statement at our web sites stating rules for use of our artwork. (I'm so lazy though, I don't know if I'll ever get it done. ) I will add some words about it to the default DC release to protect us as well.
In the meantime, we are not without rights. Everything we create is protected a little bit (whether it be graphics or prose, etc) and if someone were using it without our permission, we could get them to stop, though we couldn't get any of the money if they had been selling our stuff (we would have to prove that they were knowingly trying to rip us off).

Can you tell this is an ongoing and widely talked about subject in the 3D community (where I spend all of my non-DC time)?

Then, if we're really lucky, Bill Gates company will try and claim our art as theirs by way of orphaning, and then we can sue 'em and get rich.