Never really dove into the rabbit hole of licensing and royalties as I've always designed assets myself or had them commissioned. In this case they were provided to me as pre-existing assets.
The design of the Psyber-X static image assets currently used were made before I was brought in to do integrations, and I'd just assumed they were all commissioned art (as which was done for the battle animations of the Decks game being worked on, credit to @thisnewgirl for the awesome battle animations and death list icons)
I know the psyberxmarket.com site uses different market code (based on the inbuilt HE market functions I believe) but am unsure of if it's taking fees, this was set up before I was brought in to further build things out and do integrations.
The escrow/trade function on the Decks site does have an inbuilt variable controlling the commission float/number charged by the site, which can be adjusted if need be.
If it is unequivocally proven that any of the image assets used or provided to me by Royal Reptile/Psyber-X to distinguish between in-game items are breaking any licensing clauses then the image assets in question would be replaced with something free-use, or the escrow commission variable be adjusted to zero until licensing for all rendered assets was adhered to.
Appreciate the heads up on the potential licensing buggery, will do what I can on my end to ensure things are above the boards on anything I'm working on for Royal Reptile.
I am being told that it can only be set for the token symbol. You cannot turn off fees for just a few specific NFTs.
.
Keep in mind that Creative Commons licenses allow for commercial use but still require attribution to the original creator. You would have to add an additional property to the NFT.
This change can't be done retroactively though.
Good thing to mention and keep in mind. Agree that proper credit where it's due is important.
That depends on the Creative Commons license. Some allow commercial use and derivatives. Others do not.