Firstly, I am very new to Blender artists, so forgive me for my lack of knowledge about this.
I am working on a hard surface model, which I am planning on releasing for the Blender community. I would like to distribute it under a CC0 license.
The only problem is that I use a few parts (by that I mean 5-6 pieces) from a non-CC0 kitbash kit (link here). So does that mean that I can’t distribute it with a CC0 license?
Also, say I choose to retopologize the model manually. By this, I mean that I re-model the whole thing from scratch during retopo and I won’t be using any kitbash pieces. If I do that, can I then offer it as a CC0 model?
It does clearly state " Reselling these assets is not allowed"
You’re not technically selling stuff. But… distributing something CC0 implies you created it or have permission to distribute.
People getting your model CC0 might end up reusing parts. Why not get in touch with the artist and ask for permission. They might be fine if it’s just a couple of parts and you give credit
Thank you very much. I will definitely do that.
1 Like
In addition, I used a few brush alphas from pixologic’s alpha library in some sculpted parts. They say this about the licensing:
They can be modified or used for both personal and commercial purposes, without asking for permission or giving credits to the artists. However, you may not distribute these resources to others, either for sale or free of charge.
The “distribute” part is what confuses me - does it mean distributing the alpha file itself, or anything you make with it? And are they compatible with CC0? (Sorry for the added question)
I think it means the alphas itself. The thing you actually download. They can’t say anything about what you make using the tools. It would be like saying anything you make with a saw cannot be resold without permission from the saw makers. I’m sure corporations would love that, but it would also bring all of commerce to a halt.
As to the retopo of the original mesh I think that is a gray zone. You technically are not redistributing any of the original object. It would probably fall under is the new work different enough. There are also certain laws that talk about using part of old works, but if it’s mixed together with enough new stuff it counts as something new. If you are in the US there is also a new law that says to copyright something you have to submit the work with a fee to someplace which I forget. If it went to court and the creator of this work did not submit it with the fee his case might lose. Laws are complex.
Personally I think copyright laws have gone to crap from what they were intended. They were intended to help the original artist make some money with the hard work they did. Now a days it only benifits the rich and large coporations that have enough money to sue and bribe the courts enough to win. This is why Mickey Mouse is still copyrighted after almost 100 years even though it should have fell out after 40 years. Copyrights don’t help the original artist at all and should all be gotten rid of.
1 Like
Thanks to “Fair Use”
…just how many YouTubers would stop making money without it?! haha
When you think about it YouTubers would make more money if copyrights did not exist. Right now they depend on Google to give them cash, mixed with Patreon, and selling their own merch. Ask any Youtuber how much they make from Google and they will scoff. Best estimate I hear is 3 videos need to be put on youtube per week with each video getting 60k views in order for someone to make 30k per year. Not many can say they do that well on youtube. On top of that Google is ever shrinking that amount because no one can stop them. This means most youtubers make most of their money off of Patreon and merch.
Now let us say copyright and patents didn’t exist. This would mean people would not be spending the income as much on paying extra for the rumble feature in their controller, extra for watching a Disney movie, extra for Mickey branded ice cream, extra for windows, extra for Maya, C4D, extra for music, extra for countless things copyright makes us pay more for. This money would then be free for them to give to artist Patreons they did like and wanted to continue to fund. More small artist would get more cash. We would all also probably be using Linux and it would be way better than windows now because of all the small developers helping to make it better. It would be like Blender. All this is not even talking about all the new works we could get by using old copyrighted material. Anyone could make a movie staring Marvel characters. We could have Bugs Bunny vs. Iron Man. vs. Wonder Woman. New art is made from old art. When all the old art is copyrighted new art has to fit into that little crack that has not been filled yet. If, by chance, it is too similar to the ever growing mountain of old art, sued. While the art might be limitless there is only so much that can be popular and Disney is trying to buy all of that up so nothing else can make any money at all.
Thanks for the responses. I guess I will have to remodel a lot of parts from scratch, then.