Seeking assets for our new store!

people are usually unaware how easy it is to get all their assets from simple html5 page. And they usually do everything to promote their stuff.

shinkan If someone is intent on illegally using someone else's work, they are going to, whether it is yours or another developer's. Just look at GBA game asset rips. They're everywhere! Providing a game demo where people may be able to rip your assets in particular is not going to change anything. They aren't going to decide to not buy assets just because they can illegally use them because they most likely would not have bought them in the first place.

If you see someone using your work, you can request that they provide proof that have purchased some sort of license for your content. If they refuse, or can't, that's what lawyers are for.

Sure its easy to rip the assets, but making a profit off of them is something else all together.

If that happens, you have something to track, and something to take back.

Anyway Tom the store looks pretty darn good.

The more I read about this, the more excited I get ^^

Could there be a section on the forum or some other sort of system for people to request things? I have some plugins+effects I'd request but not sure where/who to ask

Hey all, would like feedback on the licensing for the store.

As you all know assets in the store are going to be distributed under a Royalty Free Licensing agreement. This agreement allows use in derivative works.

The current RFL license for the store allows for usage in unlimited projects. For the new store, I'm considering modifying the RFL to allow use for 1 single commercial project only (but unlimited non-commercial projects). This sort of arrangement seems fairly common on other sites (template monster for example).

The exclusive license would not only de-list the item from the store, but allow for usage in unlimited derivative works.

Alternatives would be to allow for higher numbers of commercial projects (3, 5 or 10).

What are peoples thoughts on this? Here's a draft of the licensing agreement in question:

http://pastebin.com/mBT5DRaa

This modification to the license will not affect usage for anyone who has already purchased assets from our current store!

Tom it is saying paste has been removed.

I would say give them option to use in 2 commercial projects. That will be fair for the packs which are high in price say 25 pounds and above.

Tom

Step 5 of the seller 5 steps has a typo:

"Wait for review and inlcusion!"

That sounds ok.

To be honest all I would really care about is making sure that only derivatives could be for profit, and that the template itself could not be distributed by itself, or as part of a set.

That's just for templates, graphics I think should be per project.

Of course I guess you could do a non royalty free thing for sounds, and images at some point as well.

I belive that depends on what kind of asset you are selling really.

famekrafts link works for me, still not able to see it?

Also I think it would encourage lower prices, so higher priced items would perhaps come down in price. I'm also thinking of having reviews of items that are under performing (for example zero sales in 3 months). If items do under perform, I'd contact the seller to say they need to consider making some changes or we will consider de-listing the item.

shinkan I'm trying to umbrella all assets under 1 simple to understand and fair license agreement, this will make it highly appealing and easy to understand for customers in the store and hopefully encourage more sales of assets.

Tom The link from the email was not working, the link from the forums is working.

if they do not sell for say 3 months, what kind of changes are required other than price changes?

The license looks good enough.

Tom I was only saying Your idea sound good. License "per project" seams better then RFL.

and yes - link from emails do not work. only link posted here on forum works.

I wasn't able to access the link in the email, but I can from the above post

To weigh in slightly, the updated licences seems pretty fair from both a Sellers and Buyers POV. Something I don't think was added was the terms relating to crediting the creators and whether this is something that people would be happy to have added to the agreement, as from a creators point of view it's a perfect way of making it easier for people who enjoy the stuff you used (if from the store) to know who made and designed it?

Something simple like adding "music by persons name" or "sprites by x" is a simple little thing to do to show support for the creators of the content!

Jonnie91 That will be a bit harsh as they are buying from scirra marketplace and not directly from us. Maybe Tom will have to think how exactly can that be done.

Tom Forcing price drop is not fair with the seller in my opinion, even worst threatening them to de-list. Item popularity come and go in waves, and is not something that can be predicted or always influenced with price drop.