Free Resources

[stray wren]

Right so, a discussion in #general-chat got me curious as to why 'Free Resources' are automatically assumed to have redistribution licensing despite it being the exact reverse on every other area of the site where you have to specifically state IF resources or content are/is allowed to be distributed.

There is no reason why this should be 'assumed' without specific instructions by the author. It's like someone posting art and someone else claiming it as theirs because if the creator didn't want someone to use it they'd put it behind a paywall.

Also; BBB Standard EULA:
"Redistribution: You may not make this product accessible to anyone who does not require access in order to work on the projects which this product is required for, and you will be held responsible if the product is shared outside of your project."

An author could be posting a free resource on their page to bring leads to their profile, by someone else having the full authority to redistribute this - it would negatively impact the amount of leads the author receives. Not to mention the fact that there isn't a "warning" that your resource can be distributed by anyone as long as your product is free and you don't specifically mention otherwise.

What is everyone else's opinion on this?

[copper summit]

I think you should be able to use them in server setups and maps

[stray wren]

What is the reasoning behind that, other than to line other author's pockets?

Why is it an assumption you can just have haha

[copper summit]

no idea what line other authors pockets mean

[glad moth]

Make em money

[stray wren]

Other than because it makes money for other authors

[copper summit]

barry i did NOT order a yappucino

[glad moth]

?

[copper summit]

barry was writing forever then disappeared

[severe marten]

I mean server setups can share configs and ask the person to download the required plugin separately. Which can reduce the .zip size and also save them lots of trouble

[stray wren]

Just to clarify: my issue isn't with authors choosing to make it free to redistribute. My issue is with it being the "standard" without any actual warnings given to the authors (other than a single wiki page on the site)

[steel oak]

That's its free doesn't mean the user can use it for whatever he wants. Its free to use, The creator should specify whenever and for whatever his free resource could/can be used. (in his custom TOS) if the creator does not specify it we should assume the BBB standard EULA witch includes ZERO premission to redistribution this product and its limited for resale. That's my opinion and for as i see the rules of BBB default tos

[stray wren]

Yes! I absolutely agree! That's why I don't understand why the BBB Standard EULA does not apply to free products

[steel oak]

it does not?

[stray wren]

Nope

Even though it is listed on the free products for whatever reason lol

#general-chat message

[steel oak]

in the Netherlands your work get automatically copyrighted the second you make it since you made it your self you own it yourself (its considered a right). you don't have to go trough a whole copyright stuff to get it for your creations etc

[honest lagoon]

Original discussion starts here: #general-chat message
Original discussion ends here: #general-chat message

[glass helm]

Bad analogy imo, using free resources in your setup is very different than claiming an artwork as yours

[stray wren]

Perhaps, point still stands

[glass helm]

As to why BBB standard EULA does not apply to free resources? no clue, but about the people assuming free resources are ok to use without explicit permissions, it's how it has been since a very long time, so people just assume it's still ok to so that

[stray wren]

That shouldn’t be an assumption though.. since there is no notice to people posting them, so they don’t even know they need to include “No redistribution”. Why does it have to be flipped for free resources? Surely just making authors include that’s it’s available to redistribute makes more sense.