Did you just download NASA textures and try to sell them!? WTF!?
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
you may use,adapt, and share those textures for any purpose,even commercially .
they gave me permission to sell
It is legal to sell those but why bother when it is possible to download identical textures from NASA, with higher resolution?
There is no value added. It doesn’t even look photorealistic.
if you use CC BY 4.0 you have to give credit to the author(s). You need to set up a link on them on the download page. Otherwise you’re infringing.
Please adhere to the license and give proper attribution for the source of your images. At the very least, that attribution should be included with the file package, but as an act of good faith, you should also give attribution on your Gumroad page as well.
One word for this ; pathetic…
Why? This is his licence of choice (not that I agree on it). Pictures in the public domain can be exploited pretty much any way you want. If the image came from CC By Attribution, then yes, I would agree.
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
Do you have a NASA source stating these to be CC By Attribution? I’m just curious.
https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/image-use-policy specifys you must give attributation to NASA Although, not all images are licenced the same. Dont know where the cc licence comes from though. Reselling freely avaible assets with no changes is trashy and scammy imo.
Yeah, even if its technically legal, taking someone else’s work and reselling it is scummy as fuck, period.
edit: you can report him on gumroad here, https://gumroadhelp.typeform.com/to/b96L4I hopefully we can get it taken down before anyone falls for his scam.
And NASA gives 86400x21600 textures free…
Maybe it is ok to sell full setup $5 to render physically accurate earth-moon-sun model as blend file with all assets packed with sources, optimized to fit GPU memory, enough fast for animation purposes that is more accurate and better looking than those what you can seen from National geography documents. As long as all sources are mentioned.
@CarlG Well, it appears to be a shot, and I doubt he made it himself from a space station…
@Fweeb yes indeed. At least in the files… but I guess nobody wants to buy something just to discover it has an undisclosed license… so I think it would be fair business practice to report the licensing in the page, too…
“the only mandatory credit is NASA.”
But from the wiki I linked:
" Under United States copyright law, works created by the U.S. federal government or its agencies cannot be copyrighted. (This does not apply to works created by state or local governments.) Therefore, the NASA pictures are legally in the public domain."
If they are in the public domain, how can they claim mandatory credit?
I don’t agree with the practice in general, making money out of other peoples work without even mentioning them. But I have made available under public domain as well. But frankly, I really don’t care if someone does it on this scale. It’s more of a “I don’t like you but I’ll keep my mouth shut”. Compare this to Getty images and the like that takes images from the public domain and then put a very strict licence on it. Like getting sued by Getty for using your own image since they claimed copyright on it. It’s beyond stupid.
People are getting too upset over things that are perfectly legal. Care about what needs care, the big stuff.
I kind of understand that if tax funded agency is producing data (=satellite image) to public domain or similar license and that is used to make money but there should be some value added. Same well known images as downscaled resolution isn’t doing that.
Yeah I’m not sure, it appears that you are correct. Most sites I’ve seen say you should still credit although your not required to.
I agree with you that some aspects of copyright are overbearing. I think the point of this thread should be to make people aware that they can get the above assets for free if they choose.
honeslty this thread should be locked, and the guy had a “mark” against his posts. he goes against good judgement.
No one would take blender and just sell it. Even Chinese sites at least change the names/marks/images to make it appear different
jokes aside, as stated by @GruntAxeman, if he sold a preped blend file of earth and moon with everything setup, the at least he’d put in some work to gain the needed funds from others.
Currently it is shady and very disrespectful.
Thanks for sharing. Just what I needed!