Hello! I'm making my first resourcepack. I've read a statement from Mojang about what uses of resources are and are not OK, but I'm not clear on something: To what extent are default graphics traces allowed or not allowed in a monetized resourcepack? Most of the graphics are totally original in my pack but some are derivatives of default graphics (changed to fit in with the pack but still based strongly on the original). Mostly this happens where either I didn't have any good ideas to improve that graphic at the time or where I really like the default and want to be somewhat true to the original. This happens with some blocks but mostly with items.
I'm about 2/3 done with the pack. Making 100% original graphics for the traced-down graphics would probably put me at 1/2 done. It'd be manageable but really the mobs and items are more of an afterthought for me. Alternately, as a friend suggested, I could split the blocks/environment stuff into one pack, the items and GUI into another, and the mobs into a third, temporarily, until they're all complete.
So basically I just want to know: Is tracing a default graphic into a simplified derivative, in a monetized resourcepack, forbidden? And, to what extent? Thanks for your help!
So basically I just want to know: Is tracing a default graphic into a simplified derivative, in a monetized resourcepack, forbidden? And, to what extent? Thanks for your help!
It's not allowed even in non-monetized packs. Mojang owns the copyright to their work, so derivatives are only OK to be redistributed with their permission. While we don't know their exact definition of what constitutes a derivative, here on the forum we tend to go with "is still recognizable as coming from a source" as our benchmark. So if something looks distinctly like it's a modified default texture, we rule that it belongs to Mojang and shouldn't be in your pack.
Note that this doesn't include things that are obviously homage to default but done in a different style or resolution, such as Faithful, unless it's a "mechanical edit". That is, someone took default and just ran a filter over it. This is, to the best of our ability to discern without actually being lawyers, in line with existing rulings regarding derivative works law.
The best advice I can give you is to only distribute the works that you have personally made, by yourself, from scratch in your resource pack. Wait until you have ideas for everything to distribute your pack, or else make a separate "release copy" that only contains your own artwork and nothing from the default. Here on the forums we do vet content to a certain extent, and will remove your pack if we see default textures. Best just not to have them, then you don't have to worry about copyright law, Mojang's EULA, or the forum rules.
Thanks! That makes sense. It's more or less what I figured. I'm glad I made this thread. I'll do the three-part split thing I mentioned to make things easier and more manageable in the meantime.
A related question: Some blocks have unusual shapes or purposes. For instance, the brewing stand has a particular form which is important to maintain or else the potions won't line up with the depressions in the base properly. The hopper and cauldron can only be changed so much too, as far as I can see, due to the irregular shapes and the ways the different texture parts have to physically line up in-game. Also, I am concerned about changing things like redstone components too much, because I don't want redstone enthusiasts to look at their creations and not know what they're looking at. Same for structure blocks.
So what do I do about those?
Also, it seems as though the .mcmeta files must be included in the pack or the block animations won't work, as opposed to textures which will just use what exists in the resourcepack below it if textures are missing. Am I doing something wrong? If I do have to include the .mcmeta files and not just let the game use the pack below, do I have to rewrite them all? I just looked inside them and I don't know what I'm looking at. I suspect I'll have to use an original one eventually (the wool blocks I made probably don't match the automatically generated colors on sheep in 1.12 and I assume I have to make a .mcmeta for that) but given they seem to just be a pile of numbers, are they subject to copyright?
Thanks for your help. For various reasons I don't tend to be able to just infer the small details of complicated tasks the way most people can, so I have to ask a lot of questions. Also sorry for the rambling and incoherency. I'm schizophrenic and right now my thought processes are not cooperating with what I want to do. Breakfast might help...
EDIT: Breakfast did help. I came up with a way to make the comparators and repeaters similar but original, and I'll just skip the structure blocks since I'm given to understand few people ever use them anyway. I'd still like to know about the .mcmetas and the graphics where physical shape specifications are important, though. If what I'm saying is gibberish, by all means ask questions and I'll try to clarify. Thanks for your understanding!
Hello! I'm making my first resourcepack. I've read a statement from Mojang about what uses of resources are and are not OK, but I'm not clear on something: To what extent are default graphics traces allowed or not allowed in a monetized resourcepack? Most of the graphics are totally original in my pack but some are derivatives of default graphics (changed to fit in with the pack but still based strongly on the original). Mostly this happens where either I didn't have any good ideas to improve that graphic at the time or where I really like the default and want to be somewhat true to the original. This happens with some blocks but mostly with items.
I'm about 2/3 done with the pack. Making 100% original graphics for the traced-down graphics would probably put me at 1/2 done. It'd be manageable but really the mobs and items are more of an afterthought for me. Alternately, as a friend suggested, I could split the blocks/environment stuff into one pack, the items and GUI into another, and the mobs into a third, temporarily, until they're all complete.
So basically I just want to know: Is tracing a default graphic into a simplified derivative, in a monetized resourcepack, forbidden? And, to what extent? Thanks for your help!
It's not allowed even in non-monetized packs. Mojang owns the copyright to their work, so derivatives are only OK to be redistributed with their permission. While we don't know their exact definition of what constitutes a derivative, here on the forum we tend to go with "is still recognizable as coming from a source" as our benchmark. So if something looks distinctly like it's a modified default texture, we rule that it belongs to Mojang and shouldn't be in your pack.
Note that this doesn't include things that are obviously homage to default but done in a different style or resolution, such as Faithful, unless it's a "mechanical edit". That is, someone took default and just ran a filter over it. This is, to the best of our ability to discern without actually being lawyers, in line with existing rulings regarding derivative works law.
The best advice I can give you is to only distribute the works that you have personally made, by yourself, from scratch in your resource pack. Wait until you have ideas for everything to distribute your pack, or else make a separate "release copy" that only contains your own artwork and nothing from the default. Here on the forums we do vet content to a certain extent, and will remove your pack if we see default textures. Best just not to have them, then you don't have to worry about copyright law, Mojang's EULA, or the forum rules.
I hope that helps you.
Thanks! That makes sense. It's more or less what I figured. I'm glad I made this thread. I'll do the three-part split thing I mentioned to make things easier and more manageable in the meantime.
A related question: Some blocks have unusual shapes or purposes. For instance, the brewing stand has a particular form which is important to maintain or else the potions won't line up with the depressions in the base properly. The hopper and cauldron can only be changed so much too, as far as I can see, due to the irregular shapes and the ways the different texture parts have to physically line up in-game. Also, I am concerned about changing things like redstone components too much, because I don't want redstone enthusiasts to look at their creations and not know what they're looking at. Same for structure blocks.
So what do I do about those?
Also, it seems as though the .mcmeta files must be included in the pack or the block animations won't work, as opposed to textures which will just use what exists in the resourcepack below it if textures are missing. Am I doing something wrong? If I do have to include the .mcmeta files and not just let the game use the pack below, do I have to rewrite them all? I just looked inside them and I don't know what I'm looking at. I suspect I'll have to use an original one eventually (the wool blocks I made probably don't match the automatically generated colors on sheep in 1.12 and I assume I have to make a .mcmeta for that) but given they seem to just be a pile of numbers, are they subject to copyright?
Thanks for your help. For various reasons I don't tend to be able to just infer the small details of complicated tasks the way most people can, so I have to ask a lot of questions. Also sorry for the rambling and incoherency. I'm schizophrenic and right now my thought processes are not cooperating with what I want to do. Breakfast might help...
EDIT: Breakfast did help. I came up with a way to make the comparators and repeaters similar but original, and I'll just skip the structure blocks since I'm given to understand few people ever use them anyway. I'd still like to know about the .mcmetas and the graphics where physical shape specifications are important, though. If what I'm saying is gibberish, by all means ask questions and I'll try to clarify. Thanks for your understanding!