Compatible with GDevelop

[Lazergrenade]

Hello, I am making my first game and I would like to use Gdevleop as the engine I guess you would call it. Can I use your sprite system to make my game? I spent a few days researching GPLv3 and the licensing read the read me and I am too new to understand if it will be specifically okay if I use this with Gdevelop and then try and publish it to IOS and Switch. I have no problem crediting anyone, sharing the code, or whatever else needs to be done. i have posted on Gdevelop on reddit but haven't received any information. Thank you very much for your time and I apologize for not understanding everything.

[jrconway3]

Gdevelop should be compatible as far as I am aware. When using assets with CC licenses, you must:

• Credit Every Artist involved in each asset
• Link back to the original asset

Our credits provide a full list of artists for all assets and links back to the assets, so you simply need to grab that and include it.

However, there is a caveat:

iOS, Steam, and I think Switch would be considered DRM platforms. There's a clause in CC-BY assets that people think restricts the assets from being usable on DRM platforms.

As a workaround, OGA came up with the OGA-BY license. This license is identical to CC-BY but removes the clause mentioning DRM platforms. That does mean less assets are usable, but I myself am prioritizing OGA-BY licensed assets for this same reason.

Also, CC0 can be used in these contexts, too, because there are no restrictions on CC0 assets.

[Lazergrenade]

Okay, Awesome. So under fliter I deselected the CC-By's and have CCO, OGA, and GPL selected as there appears to be no bodies without GPL. The sprite sheet appears to have uploaded into Gdevelop without issue. Thank You!

[jrconway3]

It seems like you're a bit confused here.

A multi-license means you pick one or more licenses and stick with that. You don't need to exclude assets that HAVE CC-BY or CC-BY-SA, you just need an asset that has at least either OGA-BY or CC0.

[Lazergrenade]

Oh okay yeah definitely was confused. That's sick. Thank you.

[jrconway3]

Yeah, a lot of assets were originally in CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. LPC as a whole was initially CC-BY-SA. New (looser) licenses were added later to make the style of asset more widely available.

In order for a looser license to be added, though, it must be the original creator of the asset who allows that license to be supported, which is why there's still a good number of restrictions out there.