Commons:Deletion requests/File:Minecraft 1.1 Title.png

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Minecraft 1.1 Title.png

[edit]

Uncertain status. Retored after a complain. The source website says: "You're free to do whatever you want with screenshots and videos of the game, but don't just rip art resources and pass them around." That's probably not sufficient, but let's discuss. All images from Category:Screenshots of Minecraft are concerned by this DR. Yann (talk) 10:20, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. (a) That's not a free license. (b) In particular, that's not {{Cc-by-3.0}}, as the uploader claimed. (c) It's self-contradictory. You're free to do "whatever" except distribute it? (d) There is no explicit permission for commercial uses or permission to distribute derivative works, as required by Commons:Licensing. (e) The screenshot explicitly says "do not distribute" in the screenshot itself. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also in the same agreement, they reserve the right to change this agreement at any time with or without notice, with immediate and/or retroactive effect, which is in contradiction with any free license that is irrevocable by nature.  Delete. Prof. Professorson (talk) 12:09, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep I changed {{Cc-by-3.0}} to {{Minecraft}}, and I'm sure the "do not distribute" is referring to Minecraft itself. おやすみ (talk) 11:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That template should also be deleted. The terms it links to state under "The One Major Rule": "Do not distribute anything we've made" and "Do not make commercial use of anything we've made." Again, they also prohibit distributing "art resources." This is very clearly non-free. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The players can take screenshots and distribute. They only can't extract the images directly from the program itself, in his code.--MisterSanderson (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment These concerns have been raised before, see Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2011/12#Minecraft screenshots. It is important to note that Minecraft's Terms of Use changed between March 2011 ( see [1] ) and May 2011 ( see [2] ) when the retroactive clause "We reserve the right to change this agreement" was added. Later the terms migrated from copyright.jsp to their current location at http://www.minecraft.net/terms (which further added "you may not resell any gift codes ..." and "Do not make commercial use of anything we've made." ). I think it is important to always link the conditions that were extant at the time of each uploaded screenshot, and not to use a general template.
Therefore, the current terms might very well exclude this File:Minecraft 1.1 Title.png because it is from 2012. Depending how we interpret the older copyright pages, some of the other files in the category might be considered acceptable.
My remaining comments concern only these sentences of the March 2011 copyright page whose archive I linked above: "Do not distribute anything I've made. This includes the client and the server software for the game." and "You're free to do whatever you want with screenshots and videos of the game, but don't just rip art resources and pass them around." I interpret the first two sentences as referring to the software and the included media resources (texture files, sound and music files), and the third sentence as referring to screenshots and videos made while the program is running, with the "art resources" being the various texture and icon files stored in the minecraft.jar program file . My one concern is with a few screenshots I uploaded in late 2010, and that is whether the small icons in the inventory and hotbar constitute "art resources". Those icons are rendered as exact cropped matches from the art resources files, scaled in size relative to the game window. For myself I would consider blurring or replacing those icons to avoid all doubt of abusing the de-minimis defence, but I would consider the randomly generated terrain as not being a copy of an art resource . -84user (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The bottom line is that the terms have never explicitly allowed commercial use or distribution of derivative works, and they've never explicitly claimed to be perpetual. The fact that earlier versions were silent on the matter does not mean that we can wishfully infer that those permissions were granted and that previous versions of the terms were perpetual – especially not in light of subsequent clarifications, which make it abundantly clear that the intent was never for these terms to be anything even remotely approaching free terms. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is this something we can send a message to Mojang to ask for clarification? They feel like the sort of company that would be willing to do so if we asked nicely. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 02:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is certainly the best solution to keep these images. Yann (talk) 06:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I just saw Jens Bergensten say on Twitter (here) that they're fine with people making money with Minecraft clips, so I'm sure they'd be fine with screenshots on Wikimedia Commons. Wagner (talk) 12:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Making money on adverts from Minecraft clips is not really the same as selling those clips directly. It basically means they're fine with people posting gameplays of Minecraft on youtube and making money through the youtube ads, but it doesn't mean they're okay with other types of commercial use. Besides, it still doesn't clarify if derivative works are allowed, and especially if those derivative works can be distributed. Prof. Professorson (talk) 13:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Non-copyright restrictions (such as using a different name for the product, not using trademarks, etc) are allowed. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 08:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What does that have to do with anything? The issues are that the terms prohibit distribution of "anything we've made" in general and "art resources" in particular, that they prohibit commercial use of "anything we've made," that derivative works are not explicitly permitted, and that the terms may change at any time. Those are all copyright issues. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The terms say that you can use and reuse and redistribute and alter the content. And then there is a statement saying that you should rip the design off. It's a non-copyright restriction. Compare with De_minimis#Crops_of_de_minimis_images, although crops aren't allowed they are not considered the same thing as "no derivative licence", same here (actually now thinking about it, de minimis is actually a copyright restriction, so if we delete this, we must definitely delete every de minimis image, as it's less free than these ones). VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 15:07, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete. Note the "Do Not Distribute" in the bottom right corner. Taking a screenshot from the paid game and letting people who haven't paid for the game see the screenshot is a direct violation of Mojang's copyright. 94.175.12.136 20:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Do Not Distribute"... screenshots? Or the game? They specificly allow users to make Screenshots and use them so I do not think that the text is a problem. --MGA73 (talk) 15:50, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep They allow users to make screenshots: "You're free to do whatever you want with screenshots and videos of the game". They also ask ask users "but don't just rip art resources and pass them around, that's no fun." but it is as I read it a not a "it is forbidden" but a "please don't". --MGA73 (talk) 15:50, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That doesn't address that it's not a perpetual license. It never claimed to be a perpetual license, and the statement that "we reserve the right to change this agreement at any time with or without notice, with immediate and/or retroactive effect" clearly indicates that it was never intended to be. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:12, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The "Do not distribute" text refers to the actual game and game software files (i.e the minecraft.jar file). Mojang has specifically said that they allow screenshots of the game. "You're free to do whatever you want with screenshots and videos of the game, but don't just rip art resources and pass them around, that's no fun." The art resources refer to the texture files and skin resources used in the game, as in the art resources located inside the minecraft.jar, not the screenshots. I don't see an issue with this file; can this request be closed now? - OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 06:52, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep per the reason above. 74.96.253.93 00:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete "You're free to" is neither here nor there, especially, if followed with "but" right after (and it is certainly possible to laboriously "rip" art ressources from screenshots). This is just Another Case of The Ubisoft.--217.226.79.246 11:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now these arguments are just becoming wild guesses and speculative warnings. - OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 03:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete This kills my understanding of free licrensing. In a sense, it reminds me of photos made available by Anders Behring Breivik with the description of allowing anyone any use for them This is not explicitly stated free license and stretching its interpretation this much is ouside the boundaries I personally see as proper permission. A free license includes passing resources around for the heck and fun of it and I am unsure as to whether the creators of the game really want it. Same applies to all Minecraft art, unless proper permission can be obtained. Wpedzich (talk) 19:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Minecraft license clearly say that any people can distribute and do whatever they want with videos, screenshots and other product of GAMEPLAY, but not permits to do some commercial use with minecraft resources — textures, files, etc (for example, use some minecraft texture files in hiw own game or program etc and sell it). That permition is clear for understanding, it`s fully OK to wikipedia, and I can`t understand what are you talking about. Do you need mojangas comment for that clearly fact? Sorry for my english.--Ohar (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is not Wikipedia. This is Wikimedia Commons. Files hosted here must be free for any use, including commercial uses. This so-called license is so vague and self-contradictory that we can't in good conscience rely on it to tell reusers with any kind of certainty what they can and cannot do. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete And move to local wikis as fair use. Mojang's licensing is sort of unclear, but the way I'm interpreting it, is it's basically a strict copyright on the game, and a non-commercial license on screenshots. But I'm not certain. Since it's vague, it is always better to be safe and use it under fair use, rather than assume a free license.--Unionhawk (talk) 00:46, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep As I read the terms Mojang puts on Minecraft, I understand "Screenshot is OK even for commercial use" (do whatever you want) "but game files (tilesets, charasets, etc.) are off limits" (but don't just rip art resources and pass them around.)
Trust me, except eventually for the HUD, it will be REALLY hard to rip game files from a screenshot. Ju gatsu mikka (^o^) appelez moi Ju (^o^) 15:07, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete I don't imagine I could upload an image with a stipulation that I can reclaim all rights to use, alter and distribute it if I so choose. That is effectively what the current licensing for this image is, the terms state: "We reserve the right to change this agreement at any time with or without notice, with immediate and/or retroactive effect." (emphasis added) [3].Guest9999 (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete The current terms as explained by User:84user above are explicitly revocable ("We reserve the right to change this agreement [...] with immediate and/or retroactive effect") and explicitly noncommercial ("Do not make commercial use of anything we've made."). On top of that earlier versions were unclear about whether they were revocable or noncommercial, and later clarifications clearly suggest the original intent. I can't believe, in the present situation, any Minecraft image or video is acceptable under Commons:Licensing. However, the license continues to embrace publishing of Minecraft images and videos on fan sites and YouTube, which is all Mojang really cares about. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete The license is revocable ("We reserve the right to change this agreement with immediate and/or retroactive effect"), doesn't state that it allows derivative works anywhere in the terms, and also may be non-commercial ("Do not make commercial use out of anything we made"). These images can only be used under fair use, which is not allowed on Wikimedia Commons. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 21:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment The 5 files in use on English Wikipedia have been uploaded there as fair use. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 00:44, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And you should upload the other files to the local wikis that use them if this can't be kept on commons. It might be a bit tedious, but that's what you (in general) get for interpreting it so strictly. - OjdvQ9fNJWl (talk) 00:38, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Which of the other projects allow fair use of game illustrations? --Stefan4 (talk) 00:41, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@OjdvQ9fNJWl I only speak English. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 01:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep for now. Let's ask some people from Mojang what they think about it. We have good reason for the interpretation, that all uses are allowed, while some are discouraged. Lipedia (talk) 10:08, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: This is clearly not sufficient for hosting on Commons, as their "but" does not grant a perpetual licence, to use the resources for any purpose. russavia (talk) 16:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Minecraft_1.1_Title.png&oldid=351147003"