Going Forward...

Status
Not open for further replies.

EvanSki

Raccoon Jam Host
I want to give huge thanks to @Alice @Nocturne & @GameDevDan, These guys are the true hero's behind the 41st Jam, without them this would have been a flop.
I feel like I didn't do enough for the jam and that of which I did do, was up to a quality standard, of which I apologize and will improve on going forward.

I would also like to thank everyone who participated in the jam, in the discussions and those in the discord, you guys make these jams possible!

I hope to improve my skills as jam host, and make the jam a bigger and an even greater thing for the community; I look forward to hosting more jams for the foreseeable future.


An issue I'd like to speak about:
Speaking of the Future there is something I'd like to address, apologize for, and bring to the community's attention.
I apologize that I've not said this sooner, I've been busy/forgotten about it but that's no excuse for me not mentioning this to people while wanting to promote streaming and content from the jam.
I won't get into more details about this game at this current time. But I will either make a post explaining some comments behind the scenes or explain it more on the next jam.
I will not go into specifics of what game as to avoid drama and as voting has passed and anyone that streams that game is at there own risk of copyright strikes.

I want to encourage more streaming, video reviews and generally more community interaction through out the whole jam, not just in the discussions and game making periods.
But I can not do that and also neglect to inform said content creators of something that threatens their ability to create online content.

To summarize:
This jam we have elected to have a new rule

  • The credits should make clear where the assets come from and which were made before the Jam; The creators of the entry must have rights to all of the assets; unlicensed use of resources is not allowed.

Their was indeed an entire this jam that broke this rule and sparked a discussion with collaborators of the jam. It was also made aware to me that their has never been a game disqualified from any gmc jam.
So I was at an impasse on what action should be done, and what type of outcry the community would have on this action. I understand people know everyone involved in the organization of this jam but I would like to say the end action was MINE. and MINE ALONE. Even if some will argue that's not true, I will take sole and full responsibility for the outcome of rules, and the punishment for breaking those rules for the jams I'm a host in.
So what was the outcome? I'd decided to let it slide for this time. As the rule is new and I'm extremely sure no ill intentions were meant behind the game. I will admit while I was reviewing jam games this game got me a little bothered and I feel I may have over reacted to it a lot, so to the creator of the game I apologize. And to the community I'd like to apologize for not stating that their was risk for digital content creation showing the game, once I knew of the information.
I also will not allow any acquisitions of any wrong doing about the creator of the game, at all. My main point of this topic is to be transparent as possible and to avoid any unnecessary drama.

Going forward:
From this point onwards this will be a rule that is enforced.
No game will be disqualified, but during the submission for a game, if any copyrighted material the creator of the submission is found not to own or allowed to use, shall be requested to change said material, before it is allowed in the games zip.
This does not interfere with the submission time limit, so do not fear there is no time to change the material as we will still allow the game after the copyrighted material has been removed.

Examples?
Using splash screens of companies that have not given you permission to use them. Using music from creators that have not given permission for the music to be used.
Point in simple:
If you do not have permission to use it, and it's in your game, it breaks this rule and must be changed.

I'd like to remind that this topic, and this decision shall be viewed as Mine and Mine alone. Ie: if Nocturne or any other admin has an issue with this rule/topic or such then I shall be the one responsible for it.

Closing:
With all that out of the way,
I hope to be the host of the GMC Jam for the foreseeable future. This has been a wild and fun experience, and I am glad I'm able to take a more active role in this community.
I hope that the future jams and such shall go even better then this one :)

Thank you all for letting me be a Host, thank you everyone involved in this jam.
-Evanski
 

kburkhart84

Firehammer Games
You did fine as host this time around @EvanSki , and your decision to not disqualify that game...wile I don't like it, I DO understand it. On one hand, that rule should really be implied as that's the real world, but on the other hand it technically wasn't stated beforehand, even if in reality breaking that rule is a no-no in a general sense. I kinda more feel that you shouldn't have needed to make a rule, but like I say, I understand your stand on how you handled it, and the other reality is that there is really NO way to satisfy everybody involved no matter what you do. The other consideration I have in this specific case is that the non-licensed material is also infamously used all over for these types of trolling jokes...so on the other hand I understand why this specific thing was used, as opposed to some other random thing. If it had been something else completely, I would have been somewhat less understanding of your decision since by using that specific content the creator of said game is obviously just trying to pull a big joke.
 
Ahh, I thought that rule was already a thing, but going back through jam threads, the last few have omitted any previous rule suggesting you need to have permission to use stuff that isn't yours.
It bugs me every time, since to me it feels like common sense, right? There's plenty of great free to use stuff around, so there's no real excuse barring ignorance. I have several artist and musician friends who have had their stuff stolen or used without permission, and I've seen more and more how much it can hurt them.

Anyway, I think you guys did a great job. Evanski injected enough of his own brand of humour into the hype which I think most of us got a good kick out of.
 

Nocturne

Friendly Tyrant
Forum Staff
Admin
Moderator
So what was the outcome? I'd decided to let it slide for this time. As the rule is new and I'm extremely sure no ill intentions were meant behind the game. I will admit while I was reviewing jam games this game got me a little bothered and I feel I may have over reacted to it a lot, so to the creator of the game I apologize. And to the community I'd like to apologize for not stating that their was risk for digital content creation showing the game, once I knew of the information.
I would like to say that I 100% support this and think that you have no need to apologise for anything. The GMCJam has always been about having fun and the rules have reflected that... We've always been flexible when it comes to the rules as the GMC is a true community that understands it's members (or tries to!), and as such it has to adapt to the people that participate. In this case it was a game that was submitted to have some fun and NO harm was intended, and the user in question is a lovely person that adds a lot of life and colour to this community. So not disqualifying the game I think was absolutely correct, and very much in keeping with the spirit of the GMCJam and the community as a whole.

THAT SAID... I also agree 100% that we can't let this happen again if possible and on this rule we will need to be stricter. The GMCJam may be a small community affair, but there are people that share the games, make youtube videos, and also stream the games being played. These kinds of games are potentially harmful to those people and can cost them a copyright strike or other issues. We don't live in a bubble here and we have to address the fact that some "fun" can backfire and have real-world consequences.

So, you're doing a great jopb, and don't beat yourself up over what is - in my mind - a minor issue that adding and enforcing the new rule will resolve. :)
 
Last edited:

GameDevDan

Former Jam Host
Moderator
GMC Elder
You did a great job Evan - well done. Can't wait to see you hosting more jams in future.

No game will be disqualified, but during the submission for a game, if any copyrighted material the creator of the submission is found not to own or allowed to use, shall be requested to change said material, before it is allowed in the games zip.
Tbh I think this is just creating a rod for your own back. You'll have this whole extra business where you have to personally play 20-80 entries one by one checking for copyrighted content... and when you're finally done doing that if any of them have some in you'll have to wait even longer to compile the zip while you wait for the developer to change the game (meanwhile voters will probably be nagging you to upload the zip file!)

The only game to break the rule this time around was clearly a joke game, and I'm sure they would have been fine with disqualification lol - I think going forward just make the rule clearer than I ever did and enforce it however feels right at the time (the jam has always been pretty fluid and open with the rules).
 

EvanSki

Raccoon Jam Host
You did fine as host this time around @EvanSki , and your decision to not disqualify that game...wile I don't like it, I DO understand it. On one hand, that rule should really be implied as that's the real world, but on the other hand it technically wasn't stated beforehand, even if in reality breaking that rule is a no-no in a general sense. I kinda more feel that you shouldn't have needed to make a rule, but like I say, I understand your stand on how you handled it, and the other reality is that there is really NO way to satisfy everybody involved no matter what you do. The other consideration I have in this specific case is that the non-licensed material is also infamously used all over for these types of trolling jokes...so on the other hand I understand why this specific thing was used, as opposed to some other random thing. If it had been something else completely, I would have been somewhat less understanding of your decision since by using that specific content the creator of said game is obviously just trying to pull a big joke.
I understand how you feel about the outcome but also looking at it from my perspective if a game thats just a room of assets, isnt grounds for disqualification, why should a game that's able to be played but has copyrighted content be grounds for disqualification? Its never going to be a win-win situation so the best course is to pick the "best" outcome and try and prevent the same situation from happening again.


Ahh, I thought that rule was already a thing, but going back through jam threads, the last few have omitted any previous rule suggesting you need to have permission to use stuff that isn't yours.
It bugs me every time, since to me it feels like common sense, right? There's plenty of great free to use stuff around, so there's no real excuse barring ignorance. I have several artist and musician friends who have had their stuff stolen or used without permission, and I've seen more and more how much it can hurt them.

Anyway, I think you guys did a great job. Evanski injected enough of his own brand of humour into the hype which I think most of us got a good kick out of.
I would like to say that I 100% support this and think that you have no need to apologise for anything. The GMCJam has always been about having fun and the rules have reflected that... We've always been flexible when it comes to the rules as the GMC is a true community that understands it's members (or tries to!), and as such it has to adapt to the people that participate. In this case it was a game that was submitted to have some fun and NO harm was intended, and the user in question is a lovely person that adds a lot of life and colour to this community. So not disqualifying the game I think was absolutely correct, and very much in keeping with the spirit of the GMCJam and the community as a whole.

THAT SAID... I also agree 100% that we can't let this happen again if possible and on this rule we will need to be stricter. The GMCJam may be a small community affair, but there are people that share the games, make youtube videos, and also stream the games being played. These kinds of games are potentially harmful to those people and can cost them a copyright strike or other issues. We don't live in a bubble here and we have to address the fact that some "fun" can backfire and have real-world consequences.

So, you're doing a great jopb, and don't beat yourself up over what is - in my mind - a minor issue that adding and enforcing the new rule will resolve. :)
You did a great job Evan - well done. Can't wait to see you hosting more jams in future.



Tbh I think this is just creating a rod for your own back. You'll have this whole extra business where you have to personally play 20-80 entries one by one checking for copyrighted content... and when you're finally done doing that if any of them have some in you'll have to wait even longer to compile the zip while you wait for the developer to change the game (meanwhile voters will probably be nagging you to upload the zip file!)

The only game to break the rule this time around was clearly a joke game, and I'm sure they would have been fine with disqualification lol - I think going forward just make the rule clearer than I ever did and enforce it however feels right at the time (the jam has always been pretty fluid and open with the rules).
I agree with both of these and will try to string my response to them together as they sort of relate,
I think the community also helps influence the games that break the rules, as the game ended up in the spot it was due to votes, even if that was the intention
I do also see that going through each game checking for material permission would be hard and a lot of work, so maybe more planning on that?
I do feel making it clear that this rule is enforced and needs to be followed if not any others is a clear deterrent to this type of situation.

People using music that is not their own, or any other content that's not theirs is hurtful to those who've made the content,
not to mention it can also lead to others getting in trouble. for example the mentioned game has a copyrighted song from a very well known musician with a very strict DRM team
so by having a zip that contains the music we are inadvertently redistributing the music illegally, which is worse then just getting slapped with a copyright strike on a media platform.

I think the clear goal is to try and prevent this sort of thing happening again, and catching the mistakes people might make, while also allowing everyone to participate in the jam games.
 

Alice

Toolmaker of Bucuresti
Forum Staff
Moderator
The course of action I'd recommend for that:

1. Write the rule about illegal use of copyrighted assets in CRIMSON letters so that it's more eye-catching.
Additionally, include a brief explanation that it can cause problems for Jam organisers (who distribute the ZIP) and for streamers streaming the games.
Also, state that breaking this rule will be treated particularly severely, largely because it can cause problems, more damaging than, say, a single room with a bunch of legally included assets and no gameplay whatsoever.
No need to mention the "easy way out" there - when writing rules, we want to encourage people to follow them, not confess all the potential leeways.

2. Assemble the ZIP as usual, as long as no blatant copyright infringement is spotted in the process. I wouldn't go overboard with copyright checks at this point, because it would make people wait longer for the ZIPs and - with me not having a library of all copyrighted material in existence - I'd likely still miss some potential infringements (like I didn't recognise Persona 5 or Zelda soundtracks a while back).

3. When someone points out the copyright infringement, then it sort of depends. In particular, when the game appears to have been made in good faith, and it's the first time someone breaks the rule, I'd propose to them sending a version with copyrighted material "placeholdered" (e.g. replacing copyrighted audio with silence, replacing copyrighted graphics with single-colour blobs etc.) - something that doesn't break the game, but still gets rid of copyrighted material. I wouldn't allow replacing copyrighted music with free-license music, because illegal use of copyrighted assets should still be punished somehow.
If someone does it again, I'd be more leaning towards disqualification, because they should've learned their lesson by then.
Either way, it would be up to the Jam hosts to decide what to do with the game, and with the cautionary phrasing from point 1 (underlying the potential disqualification rather than softer methods to handle the issue) it should be clear that re-adding the entry without copyrighted assets is more of a goodwill than a rule.

4. After copyright infringement is handled, a notification would be sent on the forums and other GMC Jam related channels (possibly pointing to the de-copyrighted version, if any), and the ZIP would be replaced with version that has copyright infringement removed.
 

kburkhart84

Firehammer Games
In my opinion, from here forward, I believe that if a game uses material that is not used properly(or not allowed at all), then that game should be disqualified, and possibly that person should be banned from future jams. I can understand this time around not doing anything because though it is a common sense rule, not everybody has such common sense. But as from here on that rule is in place(and will be clearly stated), there is no more excuse.

The reality is that using such material is a crime. By adding those games to the zip, you are adding on top of said crime(unknowingly mind you). Also, I don't think there is any way someone could try to claim that they "accidently" added copyrighted material to their game. I can understand one thing if you add something like a piece of licensed music and simply forgot the credits(I'm sure that happens quite often), but adding music/video that is not generally available for this kind of thing is pretty much a blatant disregard for the rules. And this is why I personally don't think that there should be any mercy for it(once the rule is stated for future jams). Like I said, for this one, common sense just didn't prevail, but for future instances, there is no excuse.

That's my piece on the topic. I'm not the person in charge of course, but that's how I see things.
 

Micah_DS

Member
I appreciate this topic, and I agree on essentially everything everyone is saying. 👍

In my opinion, from here forward, I believe that if a game uses material that is not used properly(or not allowed at all), then that game should be disqualified, and possibly that person should be banned from future jams.
I agree, but I'd say bans from future jams should only be enforced when it's a second offense, just to be absolutely sure someone gets a chance if it's a mistake made out of ignorance.
 

Pixel-Team

Master of Pixel-Fu
All great points, and while I agree with disqualification, I can't help but think on all the new people who might overlook the rules, and if I were me, I would do what Alice suggests and weigh the situation and if the violation was done out of ignorance, give the person an opportunity to fix the defect, and then fall back on disqualification if it isn't fixed immediately. I know that people make mistakes sometimes, but we can tell the difference between a mistake and a deliberate violation, as was the case here. *EDIT* Also, I'm ok with bans, but it should be reserved for repeat offenders.
 
The GMCJam may be a small community affair, but there are people that share the games, make youtube videos, and also stream the games being played. These kinds of games are potentially harmful to those people and can cost them a copyright strike or other issues. We don't live in a bubble here and we have to address the fact that some "fun" can backfire and have real-world consequences.
..and why shouldn't that be the Youtuber/streamers responsibility? Streamers are perfectly happy to take a game developers content for their own 'profit', let them curate the content themselves.

Jam is just a jam. An opportunity to push the boundary, make something you'd never normally make. Experimental art. A small group of GM-ers sharing their art together. Not sure why we need to think about someone outside of that 'bubble'.

(Although for GM-ers who take their art seriously into the future, I would definitely encourage you to use your own resources..! ☺)
 

EvanSki

Raccoon Jam Host
..and why shouldn't that be the Youtuber/streamers responsibility?
Because its not the streamers fault that they want to share something outside of our bubble.
Imagine if you will, you are on your way to work, and your boss says you're fired the moment you get there, why? Well remember that time you went around praising your coworker's hard work and told people that what they did was good? well turns out that coworker lied and well now your in trouble too for passing it around.

Was it your responsibility to make sure 100% that coworker did everything exactly as they said? No, and it shouldn't be.

Jam is just a jam. An opportunity to push the boundary, make something you'd never normally make. Experimental art. A small group of GM-ers sharing their art together.
I agree with this completely, A jam is a fun and exciting thing for a community.

Not sure why we need to think about someone outside of that 'bubble'.
To invite others into our Community, The same handful of people doing the same thing year after year isnt a community event, thats brunch.


(Although for GM-ers who take their art seriously into the future, I would definitely encourage you to use your own resources..! ☺)
And thats the main point, To encourage others to create their own content, or at the least use content they are allowed to use.
And to protect those that wish to praise or share the work that others did.

Streamers are perfectly happy to take a game developers content for their own 'profit', let them curate the content themselves.
whether or not streamers streamers are "taking a game developers content for their own 'profit'" is irrelevant here, and a matter to be discussed between the game developer and content creator.
Seeing as the GMC is a community home to a lot of users, the choice to protect content creators is one that benefits all people the most, and is far better then just letting everyone deal with it themselves.

If you don't feel that way lets imagine another example, light your house on fire, call the fire department and have them tell you its your responsibility to keep your house not on fire. Deal with it.
Pretty messed up right?

TL;DR
I want everyone to be safe to share their games and have others share those games, to help build the community more, and have the GMC Jam be a bigger and greater thing, time and time again.
 
..and why shouldn't that be the Youtuber/streamers responsibility? Streamers are perfectly happy to take a game developers content for their own 'profit', let them curate the content themselves.
Youtube? Sure. Livestream? We can argue about how streamers 'affect' the industry, but playing ahead of time to see if the developer actually has the rights to the product they deliver is ridiculous... especially in the case of jam entries where recording is more a service to the developer than entertainment (imo). This isn't the maker of the game creating a copyright claim.
Jam is just a jam. An opportunity to push the boundary, make something you'd never normally make. Experimental art. A small group of GM-ers sharing their art together. Not sure why we need to think about someone outside of that 'bubble'.
Pewdiepie isn't playing the jam entries. This is the 'bubble', the community.
(Although for GM-ers who take their art seriously into the future, I would definitely encourage you to use your own resources..! ☺)
It's not even something that needs encouragement, there's free resources everywhere.
 

Nocturne

Friendly Tyrant
Forum Staff
Admin
Moderator
and possibly that person should be banned from future jams.
I'd just like to comment on this... One of the reasons this community has grown to become such a great place is because of it's forgiving nature. There are more than a few members here that have been banned - and some of them for some pretty terrible things! - and then been let back onto the forums again simply because we believe that people change. Personal growth and maturity is REAL and even within a short space of time people can change after reviewing past deeds. So, I'm afraid I would not at all support any type of permanent bans for people who break the rules of the Jam. The forum itself doesn't practice such a thing, so I don't think that a sub-forum within the forum should either! That said, I'm not against saying that the person can't participate in the next jam or something like that. Having a one jam cool-off for people that break the rules would be okay I think, although, again, I personally wouldn't do it.

..and why shouldn't that be the Youtuber/streamers responsibility? Streamers are perfectly happy to take a game developers content for their own 'profit', let them curate the content themselves.
Streamers and content creators exist in a theoretically balanced ecosystem - the streamer gets viewers playing the creators games, and the creator gets sales from people who have seen the stream. Done correctly this is a win/win situation for everyone. Saying that a good-faith actor that streams a game that has bad-faith content and then get's a copyright strike against them because of it is the fault of the streamer is victim blaming, pure and simple. And a rather cynical attitude if you don't mind me saying. This is also a rather disingenuous reply that forgets completely the small and VERY niche environment that we're talking about: The GMCJam. I doubt anyone streaming the Jam games has an audience of millions, and I also doubt that they are profiting from it in any way. Having participated in a few such streams I can also say that every dev whose game is played on the stream is delighted to see someone play their game.
 
Last edited:

kburkhart84

Firehammer Games
So, I'm afraid I would not at all support any type of permanent bans for people who break the rules of the Jam. The forum itself doesn't practice such a thing, so I don't think that a sub-forum within the forum should either! That said, I'm not against saying that the person can't participate in the next jam or something like that. Having a one jam cool-off for people that break the rules would be okay I think, although, again, I personally wouldn't do it.
IMO, you guys are too forgiving. However, I CAN see the point recognizing that people can change. So I wouldn't be completely against doing the banning on a temporary basis. I WOULD be against a complete lack of banning though, especially and more so if the offense is completely in bad faith(on purpose, knew rules in advance). But yes, some people do change so I get it.

This is also a rather disingenuous reply that forgets completely the small and VERY niche environment that we're talking about: The GMCJam. I doubt anyone streaming the Jam games has an audience of millions, and I also doubt that they are profiting from it in any way. Having participated in a few such streams I can also say that every dev whose game is played on the stream is delighted to see someone play their game.
I was thinking the same thing when I saw this...I joined in a few of the streams and there were never more than maybe 20 in one, and more commonly it was like 5 to 10. These people aren't at the stage of really making any money off this stuff just yet. And indeed, I was HAPPY to see people playing my games. There is NO better feedback than real-time playtesting and response.
 

EvanSki

Raccoon Jam Host
So, I'm afraid I would not at all support any type of permanent bans for people who break the rules of the Jam.
Just so my input is marked down somewhere, I'm not for bans either and as such shall not be waving them willy nilly.
If there is a person intentionally breaking the rules, they will be dealt depending on the situation.

I am not making the Jam act like how the forum was long ago.
 

Posh Indie

That Guy
I figure I know what prompted this, @EvanSki, and I think you were well within "You're fine" limits (Even before changes have been made). I was surprised to see you get caught off balance, though. I see the "who" and immediately think, "Alright, this is going to damage neurons." I figured the rest of the community was on the same page by now as we have about 3 (Unspecified, but probably obvious by their own design) individuals who are consistently displaying single digit intelligence (Intentionally?).

Honestly, the "what" and the "who" just made it, "I kind of expected that and it explains a lot, but it is a depressing reflection of what the community has allowed and perpetuated". Unfortunately, the situation is the end result of increasingly obnoxious behaviors and remarks going unchecked for years until finally the individual feels safe enough bringing it into a Jam in digital format (And when they do, what would you expect? A solid attempt at something worth their own time? Unfortunately, it shows it was worth it to them even at their own expense outside of the community).
 
I'd like to add that it's not just against the jam rules, it's against the forum rules and the law. I'm not calling for bans, but I wouldn't defend/ignore it either (not that any mods are).

One party involved has infamously defended their properties, so to slap their name at the start of a landslide of infringements might not be the best choice. (Especially since they allow this game engine access to their platform)

The other consideration I have in this specific case is that the non-licensed material is also infamously used all over for these types of trolling jokes...so on the other hand I understand why this specific thing was used, as opposed to some other random thing.
GMS2 is perfectly capable of opening urls, which is how that troll is traditionally and legally performed.
 
Streamers and content creators exist in a theoretically balanced ecosystem - the streamer gets viewers playing the creators games, and the creator gets sales from people who have seen the stream. Done correctly this is a win/win situation for everyone. Saying that a good-faith actor that streams a game that has bad-faith content and then get's a copyright strike against them because of it is the fault of the streamer is victim blaming, pure and simple.
I'm sorry. Are we talking about the same thing? Or is there some context I'm missing?
I was under the impression we were talking about games using assets (art or music) which was owned by a third party.(i.e. nintendo, sega, etc) You'll have to stop me if we're talking about something else, because I hardly think portraying this as bad-faith content is fair. Probably about 98% of the games made with GM are by hobbysts, they're art projects, and they contain 'borrowed' assets.
(And are often including many fan games. :) )

Also, I disagree that it's victim-blaming. Streamers have an obligation to curate their own content. It's hardly the responsibility of a GM hobby developer' who knock something together an art project in an evening to worry about maybe some streamer might open the game on stream. (Or maybe it is... hence this discussion )

(Most games/art pieces that have 'borrowed' assets have distribution issues anyway)

And , sorry, but the word 'profit' (in quotes of all things )is *not* cynical.... let's make this clear, this is about a non-profit, art-project, jammy between game dev hobbiests. There is *no* commercial intent for 99% of Jam entries (I think is a fair assumption). That context actually does make a difference, without pulling out my GMC lawyer hat.

Also; really Nocturne? :)'bad-faith', 'victim blaming', ' cynical and disingenuous'.
Any other negative context you'd like to fold into my posts?

I'm just asking questions about a conversation about potentially exclude a bunch of artists and hobbyists from potentially putting something into the Jam, for apparently the only reason being to cater to streamers. I'm also curious about where this will next lead.. if GM Jam is happy to be responsible for curating the content of the community contributions, is the GMC going to look at curating the content on the forum? Remove fan-games? Clones? Re-makes?

I'm sure there must be a lot of very ethical game developers on this forum who would agree that we should get rid of all those 'fake' GM developers that give the others a bad rep. ;)

(Also, how is there not a GMC lawyer emote, this forum is full of them in my experience... :))

Was it your responsibility to make sure 100% that coworker did everything exactly as they said? No, and it shouldn't be.
No, you're not responsible for what your fellow artist did, so don't try ban/block their work. They're responsible for their own work, and distribution (or non-distribution) of.

(also, co-worker? really? :D It's an Art Jam, not a union!)
 

EvanSki

Raccoon Jam Host
I'm just asking questions about a conversation about potentially exclude a bunch of artists and hobbyists from potentially putting something into the Jam, for apparently the only reason being to cater to streamers. I'm also curious about where this will next lead.. if GM Jam is happy to be responsible for curating the content of the community contributions, is the GMC going to look at curating the content on the forum? Remove fan-games? Clones? Re-makes?

I'm sure there must be a lot of very ethical game developers on this forum who would agree that we should get rid of all those 'fake' GM developers that give the others a bad rep. ;)

(Also, how is there not a GMC lawyer emote, this forum is full of them in my experience... :))
Anything out side the GMC Jam is Nocturne's domain and what he says goes. So anything not relating to the jam is irrelevant.

The only reason is not to just cater to streamers
People using music that is not their own, or any other content that's not theirs is hurtful to those who've made the content,
not to mention it can also lead to others getting in trouble. for example the mentioned game has a copyrighted song from a very well known musician with a very strict DRM team
so by having a zip that contains the music we are inadvertently redistributing the music illegally, which is worse then just getting slapped with a copyright strike on a media platform.
Its to protect everyone involved.


so don't try ban/block their work.
I'm not for bans either and as such shall not be waving them willy nilly.
(Also, how is there not a GMC lawyer emote, this forum is full of them in my experience... :))
Maybe if you took less time trying to fight for something that is against the law

and spent more time reading what you're talking about, I wouldn't have to quote myself.

It's an Art Jam, not a union!
Its a community game jam, not an "art" jam.



If this is what the thread is spiraling into It shall be locked
Everything I've said is final, no matter if anyone thinks I'm a softie or not.
 
Anything out side the GMC Jam is Nocturne's domain and what he says goes. So anything not relating to the jam is irrelevant.
... :)

Its to protect everyone involved.
Maybe if you took less time trying to fight for something that is against the law
Great points. And this is where the conversation is now boiling down to. Is this a decision being made because it's illegal, and therefore the community doesn't want it, or is it for 3rd-party streamers etc.

And the follow on, what happens to fan games on GMC? Illegal? Should be removed? Are we only talking Music, or are we talking graphical assets, too?
How about game design IP?

These are fair questions. The forum, and YYG's have always taken the position of 'not-involved'. I.e. the old sandbox was full of clone games (and YYG's got a lot of traffic from people comin to play their favorite fan-games).
So it's interesting to see the community taking a stand against 'asset borrowers'.

Normally these things would be best left to the community. They vote for the games they like/respect the most, which would generally be games that use custom assets. This avoids having some people (or someone) having to make all the "ethical/moral/legal" decisions.

Its a community game jam, not an "art" jam.
I probably shouldn't even respond to this, as of course this is subjective, but games are art by definition.

If this is what the thread is spiraling into It shall be locked
Everything I've said is final, no matter if anyone thinks I'm a softie or not.
... :)
 

Nocturne

Friendly Tyrant
Forum Staff
Admin
Moderator
And the follow on, what happens to fan games on GMC? Illegal? Should be removed? Are we only talking Music, or are we talking graphical assets, too?
Just to point out, we don't permit fan games on the forums either. Any game that we become aware of that uses copyrighted material is either not permitted to be posted, or removed after the fact when we are informed/find out. While this is a community forum, we are - at the end of the day - funded by YoYo Games, and we have a debt to them to maintain things here as legally correct as possible. And by copyrighted material I mean, art, music, names, trademarks, etc...
 
Just to point out, we don't permit fan games on the forums either. Any game that we become aware of that uses copyrighted material is either not permitted to be posted, or removed after the fact when we are informed/find out. While this is a community forum, we are - at the end of the day - funded by YoYo Games, and we have a debt to them to maintain things here as legally correct as possible. And by copyrighted material I mean, art, music, names, trademarks, etc...
Oh, this one is new to me. Understandable, but very, very interesting. With no comment on legality/ethics of it all, what a shame to the fan/hobbyist community, who contributed massively to GM's growth and spread.
Is this why Gauntlet revisited isn't on the forum anymore?
 

Cantavanda

〜Flower Prince〜
EDIT: Oopsy, accidentally clicked on post while only having written half. It is now complete, this post.

I just found this thread.
It is about me and my abomination I figured.
I really respect your apology, and it is fully accepted, but actually, I think I should be the one apologising.

Here's what I did wrong:
My game was completely selfish. It broke the copyright rule, and it contained disturbing and tasteless content. It was done in a very selfish way since I did not participate a lot in the discussions or showed any interest in the games of the others. I just posted my own bad joke without thinking of any consequences of anyone who played it, streamed it, or made other games.
When I saw your stream of my game, and your review, I was in shock. I was not in shock because of your opinion or reaction/review to it, but because I realized what a terrible thing I had done. I wanted to send you a private message apologising for it, but I felt too much shame. I also warned another streamer who was going to play my game to not play it, luckily he listened to me. I felt like I ruined the fun of the entire jam just because of my usual bullcrap.

I feel like I'm not at all in the position to defend myself in any way, I caused too much trouble. But here are two little things:
1) The last Jam I participated in, was in 2013. It also contained plenty of copyrighted material, but it wasn't a problem at all back then.
But as an argument against that defense, I shouldn't have assumed the rules were the same, and actually read the new rules.

2) I have a combination of serious mental issues and disorders (that I will not specifiy in detail) that cause a lot of trouble in me. I'm a troublemaker everywhere in life because of that. I'm not always the same person, and experience regular psychotic episodes where I mix up reality with fantasy, and lose touch with reality or rational thinking. This has all been medically diagnosed after heavy testing, so it's not me making this up to defend myself or because it's "cool".
I was in a very deep psychosis when I made this game. Sometimes I get attracted to more gruesome things in these times. The gameover screen was the direct result of that. I find this gameover screen a very bad choice now that I'm feeling fine again...

About my posts: I actually have no idea if I'm a troll or not... When I post dumb things, I don't know if this is intentionally dumb to troll, or if I'm being genuine in some way or shape. I don't understand myself, and what I say. I don't know who I really am. I hope I can get needed help in the future. Appointements are made for more psychological help.

I'd like to apologise to all who take serious bother in my status updates. I know Siolfor the Jackal doesn't like them. I fully understand him. They can be very annoying at times.

I hope I can be truly forgiven, because I have sincere regret, and I will not do something like this again.

I will probably still make dumb status updates and sometimes post in off-topic. But I'll never share any gruesome content anymore, no matter how I'm feeling. And if I ever decide to participate again, it will be all original content.

I wish I had the skills to be able to participate in a future jam. I even have ideas for some games. But I can only make music and work wtih D&D GM8... But seeing that I'm not permanently banned, I will try some day to take some time to learn this stuff. I have GMS1.4 and 2. But priorities in life prevented me from learning it properly for the past 10 years.
 
Last edited:

EvanSki

Raccoon Jam Host
EDIT: Oopsy, accidentally clicked on post while only having written half. It is now complete, this post.

I just found this thread.
It is about me and my abomination I figured.
I really respect your apology, and it is fully accepted, but actually, I think I should be the one apologising.

Here's what I did wrong:
My game was completely selfish. It broke the copyright rule, and it contained disturbing and tasteless content. It was done in a very selfish way since I did not participate a lot in the discussions or showed any interest in the games of the others. I just posted my own bad joke without thinking of any consequences of anyone who played it, streamed it, or made other games.
When I saw your stream of my game, and your review, I was in shock. I was not in shock because of your opinion or reaction/review to it, but because I realized what a terrible thing I had done. I wanted to send you a private message apologising for it, but I felt too much shame. I also warned another streamer who was going to play my game to not play it, luckily he listened to me. I felt like I ruined the fun of the entire jam just because of my usual bullcrap.

I feel like I'm not at all in the position to defend myself in any way, I caused too much trouble. But here are two little things:
1) The last Jam I participated in, was in 2013. It also contained plenty of copyrighted material, but it wasn't a problem at all back then.
But as an argument against that defense, I shouldn't have assumed the rules were the same, and actually read the new rules.

2) I have a combination of serious mental issues and disorders (that I will not specifiy in detail) that cause a lot of trouble in me. I'm a troublemaker everywhere in life because of that. I'm not always the same person, and experience regular psychotic episodes where I mix up reality with fantasy, and lose touch with reality or rational thinking. This has all been medically diagnosed after heavy testing, so it's not me making this up to defend myself or because it's "cool".
I was in a very deep psychosis when I made this game. Sometimes I get attracted to more gruesome things in these times. The gameover screen was the direct result of that. I find this gameover screen a very bad choice now that I'm feeling fine again...

About my posts: I actually have no idea if I'm a troll or not... When I post dumb things, I don't know if this is intentionally dumb to troll, or if I'm being genuine in some way or shape. I don't understand myself, and what I say. I don't know who I really am. I hope I can get needed help in the future. Appointements are made for more psychological help.

I'd like to apologise to all who take serious bother in my status updates. I know Siolfor the Jackal doesn't like them. I fully understand him. They can be very annoying at times.

I hope I can be truly forgiven, because I have sincere regret, and I will not do something like this again.

I will probably still make dumb status updates and sometimes post in off-topic. But I'll never share any gruesome content anymore, no matter how I'm feeling. And if I ever decide to participate again, it will be all original content.

I wish I had the skills to be able to participate in a future jam. I even have ideas for some games. But I can only make music and work wtih D&D GM8... But seeing that I'm not permanently banned, I will try some day to take some time to learn this stuff. I have GMS1.4 and 2. But priorities in life prevented me from learning it properly for the past 10 years.

You are fine Cantavanda, You made a troll game and you accomplished that goal, I feel like my reaction to it was over reacted then it should have been so I apologize for that.
You have no need to apologize for your game, you wanted to make a joke in your style, and with no ill intentions.

The rule is new so I feel like a punishment is unwarranted,
The main topic of discussion is in a general sense, not trying to point you out as a bad guy.
The main sense is how to prevent others and future games from having copyrighted content.
I apologize if it seems like I'm singling you out.

I enjoy your odd status posts from time to time so no worries.
I do hope you get the help you are seeking to get.
And I hope to see you participate in more jams!
:)


Addressing the topic
I don't want anyone to feel upset about breaking a rule in the jam, and I don't want to bar anyone off from the jam from doing so.

The jam is meant to be fun and a community event.
We cant have a fun community, if everyone who makes a mistake is prevented from joining in again.
Someone would have to be purposely trying to ruin the jam over and over for me to even consider a ban.


I think I've found a solution.
The fun parts of the jam are having people review the work you put in and earning a reward at the end.

So if obvious copyright is found it will be asked to change before its allowed into the zip.

But for the ones that do make it through,
the ranking will be at the mercy of the voters. and have a small -points added from the ranking to make it more fair to others.

the game will not be eligible for any best of category or medal
I get mistakes do happen, so you will still receive a ranking medal but probably not the one the game would have gotten without the copyrighted content.

The rule will be made clear as day, and offer good suggestions to help prevent someone accidentally making the mistake.
 

Nocturne

Friendly Tyrant
Forum Staff
Admin
Moderator
And with those two last posts I think this topic has run it's course and I'm going to close it. I really don't think there is much more to discuss, and all I can say is that I trust @EvanSki to do the best job possible with the GMCJam and that I love having @Cantavanda on the forums, and I accept and understand their issues and hope that this forum can be considered a safe haven for them, and that they get the any help and support they need in the future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top