I don't think I've ever seen a bigger misunderstanding of how asset license copyright laws work. This account is not off to a great start, but I can't wait to see what other projects you look into.
Would be pretty funny if "hive-detectives" is only dedicated to smearing and harassing one project without ever investigating any other abuses.
Damnnnnnnn yeah....
That is very honest and from what I see that is just exactly what has happened here.
Excellent and honest analysis.
It does seem like this is just a hatchet account. Opened by WHO!
Who is behind this?
It will be revealed eventually.
Can't freely put out dirty laundry if I can be threatened to get a witness vote removed.
Why misunderstanding? The purchased NFTs were not allowed to be further sold under the license agreement, but that´s exactly what happened. Please let me know where I misunderstood. Thanks!
Here in the form it was downloaded means, you can't sell, give or assign it to someone the model files you have downloaded. It doesn't mean you can't sell something where the model was used.
The first image you shared depends on whether the NFT is part of the project or not. An NFT that is part of the project, would merely be a component of the project.
Well, I am not convinced if your interpretation would hold up on court.
I am pretty sure it would hold up. Otherwise, any game that would make use of an asset market would not be able to be sold. Which is not the case.
Integrating assets in games and selling single images as NFTs, is quite different.
The asset was not sold, given, or assigned to another person or entity in the form it's downloaded from the site.
Buying an NFT in Psyber X allows you use of the stats and an integrated form of the licensed art wherein the gameplay is the focus.
What you can not do is repackage the image and sell the art to another user for use in their game. Creating an aesthetic NFT with no other uses would certainly fly dangerously close to this use, but our use falls well within the language of the license.
The next line even assumes you are using it in a commercial project, which means, they expect you to sell a product using their license. What they do no want you to do is to provide the asset in its entirety for unlicensed use.
None of the assets are given in a standalone state, but instead as integrated into the larger game.
Hm, I can´t judge, but it sounds a bit far-fetched if you say "we didn´t resell the art" when you "only" sold an NFT containing the art.
Also I am not familiar enough with the game. So far the NFTs can´t be used in the game, or can they?
NFT's on hive do not contain images. The NFT cannot contain art.
NFTs on Hive do contain images.
IPFS hashes that in most cases are readonly.
.
And that is the case for psyberx too.
They admitted their wrongdoing and are now finally talking to the artists to try and sort this out.
The metadata of the NFTs cannot be changed though. Remediations can only be put in place for apps that consume that data, but they need to be aware of the issue.
cc: @stayoutoftherz
Speaking with artists to ensure they are aware of how their licensed asset is being used is not an admission of wrongdoing.
That's called a remediation attempt.
.
There would nothing to talk about if they knew nothing was wrong.
But sure, psyberx be psyberx and never admit fault despite all the evidence.
Let's agree to disagree.
Please feel free to suggest projects / games / proposals in our new Discord. And we appreciate more reviewers coming on board as well.
.
PS. Disclosure:
He is part of the psyberx team, as many others in the replies section
I am not a team member for Psyber X. I am a volunteer discord admin for the project. My opinions are my own.
Thanks for clarifying.
Sure thing. I look forward to seeing your future investigations. Lots of shady happenings on hive.
I agree completely. This account was just made yesterday, obvious smear campaign. From what I read, PsyberX is within the legal confines.
It doesn´t matter how old the account is. Smear campaign or not, the facts are deciding, and indeed it is clearly stated that the NFTs are not allowed to be sold further. Yes, they can be used, but the selling aspect is the relevant one. Only fulfilling one clause doesn´t mean you can ignore other clauses :)
Absolutely if this was some long-running project it would give them credibility.
Just made account to smear and attack an established hive business? Is this really going to be allowed?
The age of an account has no relevance to the validity of the assertions. It's an ad hominem to attack the one making the argument instead of the elements of their argument. Yes, age adds credibility, but that also does not make anyone immune to criticism or incapable of error either.
Hurt your bags?