3000 Sound Effects Pack Torrent
Posted on
Filter posts by subject: FAQs & Wiki 1 2 Posting Guidelines v3.5 is a game development community for developer-oriented content. We hope to promote discussion and a sense of community among game developers on reddit. Off Topic Feedback requests / 'Play my game' Post an about your game or use the to trade feedback Job Offers, Recruiting, and related activities Use and for that Promotion Once-per-game feedback requests or release threads are OK, but a considerable history of participation on is required. Must be a Text Post. Devlogs that do not have a focus on being useful to other developers. Do not talk about what advancements occurred on your game this week. That is what Feedback Friday, Screenshot Saturday, and are for.
Memes Giveaways Explicitly On Topic Gamedev-relevant Articles, Videos, and Announcements Free Assets (please specify license) 09/2017: Posting on-sale assets is no longer allowed Language/Framework discussions Be sure to check the. AMAs If you have a unique perspective on something, we'd love to hear it. This is not a way to promote your game/kickstarter/etc, please see above. The focus should be on providing info to the community, not promoting yourself. Be sure to include your education and years of experience to provide some context. Restrictions Do not use tags, assign flair to your post after it's created.
Question posts. Should include what you've already tried and why it was inadequate. Be sure to check the. Minimum Text Submission Length 40 words or so. That's about two tweets. Surveys and polls. Should have their results shared with us.
Shared Assets. Should have a proper license included in the post itself. Please include images/samples in your post!
'Share Your Stuff' threads. Should have the OP posting in the comments alongside everyone else, if they post. Socialize: Join our Watch Weekly threads: Related communities 1 2. Some legal questions. Is the license intended to allow derivative works?
(such as mixing your music with other music) Is this license intended to be roughly similar to either or? Is there a reason for writing a custom license instead of using one of those? HOW THESE TERMS MAY BE CHANGED It may be necessary for the Licensor to revise these Terms from time to time, including for the purposes of: 12.1. Changes in how payments are accepted; or 12.2. Changes in relevant laws and regulatory requirements, which apply to the Royalty Free SFX libraries. Every time the Licensee places an order via the Website for Royalty Free SFX libraries, the Terms in force at that time will apply to the Contract between the Licensee and the Licensor.
Whenever any changes are made to these Terms in accordance with this clause, the Licensor will keep the Licensee informed by stating that these Terms have been amended and stating the relevant date of the changes on the Website. Does changing the terms affect only new acquisitions or also affect people that previously downloaded? Because in the latter case, this may make the license. Thanks for clarifying. That's an interesting situation: you are okay with people using the audio in commercial projects, but you don't want people to sell the audio by itself. (clauses 3.5 and 4.1, correct me if I'm wrong) It seems this doesn't exactly fit standard licenses, like the creative commons ones (they have a license that fully allow commercial use, and one that forbids it completely - neither apply to your case).
Creative commons have a clause to prevent people from claiming ownership however. IANAL, but it doesn't seem compatible when combined with GPLed art, because it does not allow commercial use and I can't see terms regarding derivative works. Indeed, by not allowing commercial use, it isn't compatible with any kind of copyleft license (such as copyleft variants of creative commons, etc).
Free Sound Effects Pack
(GPL should be used only for software, but it can actually cover any kind of work, because it defines 'source code' as just 'the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it') But perhaps it is compatible with GPL source code. Many games are distributed with GPL source + proprietary assets (some examples ), and there doesn't seem to be any legal trouble with that. It would be problematic if distributing your game alongside the assets made your game a 'derivative work' of the assets - but it can also be argued that game assets are only input to the game (and therefore you could switch an asset for another, etc), and that their distribution is just an 'aggregate' (those are the terms that GPL uses). I'm not asking if the product can be re-licensed; I’m purely asking if the sounds can be added into a GPL software product. It does not allow commercial use GPL software can totally be commercially sold, there’s no restriction in that regard (as long as you abide by the distribution and source code requirements) — and if there was, then the sound effect library would be more permissive anyway. GPL art, meanwhile, is irrelevant for my question. Yes, GPL is maybe not the best license for your art assets.
I mean that does not allow commercial use. (see section 4. THE LICENSEE MAY NOT) GPL, on the other hand, not only allow commercial use, but is incompatible with any license that disallow such use. From this I can only conclude that GPL is incompatible with OP's license.
'GPL compatibility' of a license L is only relevant if the work X, GPL-licensed, is to be combined with work Y, L-licensed, to create a derivative work containing both X and Y. This combined, derivative work of both X and Y, can only be created if license L is compatible with GPL. What I'm trying to convey is that if just using the assets won't make your game a derivative work of the assets, then it isn't necessary to have the assets licensed in a way compatible with GPL.