Am i allowed to use screenshots of creations I make in a project I'm doing for fun?

[nascarlaser1]

Hello!

About a year ago i started a world building project. For those who don't know, world building is exactly what the name implies, its building a fictional world from scratch,similar to what is done for shows or movies like LOTR. I recently realized i could use KSP to build models of my vehicles, not only for visual purposes but also to check if their actually somewhat realistically usable (i have a tendency to design bricks that can magically fly with unicorn dust when i use just paper). However, i was wondering if there were any rules,legal or otherwise, that prevent me from creating screenshots of my creations and attaching them to the article i write about my world. My world is on a different website, so it doesn't violate the forum's RP rules. I tried reading the TOS for KSP but got overwhelmed by it, so if there is information there i probably missed it.

 

Thank you!

Edit to clarify 1 thing i forgot: The world itself is in no way linked to KSP, I just like using KSP to model my vehicles so its easier to visualize then just words.

Edited July 10, 2019 by nascarlaser1

[Pecan]

Good luck with that.  When I wrote my (free) book on rocket design Squad not only failed to give permission to use pictures but couldn't even come up with copyright-attribution text to say KSP belonged to them.  Total no-hopers.  Now it all belongs to Take Two you''ll at least be dealing with professionals but whether that's good or bad you'll have to find out.

Here is what you have to do:
A.  Write to Take Two detailing each and every image you wish to use, in context.  Await reply.  Pay fee.
B.  Grace Hopper, "It is often easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission" (just do it and, if you're low-profile enough they won't notice or will not mind)
C.  Process the pictures, either through in-game mods (such as vessel view, if it still exists) or proper image-processing software, to the extent that they become 'original works' and are therefore your copyright, not Squad/Take Two's.

Let us know how you got on.

PS:  When I tried Squad made it very clear that YouTube videos were the only media they understood.  They really liked people making videos as it gave them free publicity.  Books were just completely outside their comprehension.  They didn't like people making books.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Pecan

[nascarlaser1]

55 minutes ago, Pecan said:

Good luck with that.  When I wrote my (free) book on rocket design Squad not only failed to give permission to use pictures but couldn't even come up with copyright-attribution text to say KSP belonged to them.  Total no-hopers.  Now it all belongs to Take Two you''ll at least be dealing with professionals but whether that's good or bad you'll have to find out.

Here is what you have to do:
A.  Write to Take Two detailing each and every image you wish to use, in context.  Await reply.  Pay fee.
B.  Grace Hopper, "It is often easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission" (just do it and, if you're low-profile enough they won't notice or will not mind)
C.  Process the pictures, either through in-game mods (such as vessel view, if it still exists) or proper image-processing software, to the extent that they become 'original works' and are therefore your copyright, not Squad/Take Two's.

Let us know how you got on.

PS:  When I tried Squad made it very clear that YouTube videos were the only media they understood.  They really liked people making videos as it gave them free publicity.  Books were just completely outside their comprehension.  They didn't like people making books.

Vessel Viewer does still exist: 

What exactly would i need to do in order to make them original works? I don't know of any image processing software (or even what that means). Also, if i built a creation and took a screenshot of it,wouldn't automatically be considered original works since its 100% my build?

[steuben]

12 minutes ago, nascarlaser1 said:

I don't know of any image processing software (or even what that means).

Paintshop Pro, Photoshop, Gimp, MS Paint.

 

Quote

Also, if i built a creation and took a screenshot of it, wouldn't automatically be considered original works since its 100% my build?

It would be an derivative work  rather than original work; if you went with stock parts, and mod parts. 

Now if you went full bore and created a library of parts and used KSP to glue the parts together and test them, then you would be able to argue original work. Though I think there might be better tools for that out there.

 

 

[nascarlaser1]

19 minutes ago, steuben said:

Paintshop Pro, Photoshop, Gimp, MS Paint.

 

 

I use gimp all the time, and vessel viewer looks interesting. Do you know if I need to do anything specific with one of the programs, or just save the screenshot in gimp/vessel viewer?

21 minutes ago, steuben said:

It would be an derivative work  rather than original work; if you went with stock parts, and mod parts. 

 

Speaking of mod parts: If i were to use them (rn im planning to use stock only) I assume i would need to check the license of each mod and/or message the mod owner before doing so,correct?

[steuben]

VV dumps a PNG file to the screenshot directory. <insert image software> should be able to run from there with it.

[nascarlaser1]

1 minute ago, steuben said:

VV dumps a PNG file to the screenshot directory. <insert image software> should be able to run from there with it.

Thxs! So once i have PNG i dont need further editing? (srry for the broken record just want to be sure i fully understand before i screw up something 

[Kerbart]

In addition, a lot of people will tell you “fair use” which is generally interpreted as a “license to steal” (it’s ok because it is fair use), which it is not. Claiming it’s Fair Use doesn’t make it so—it has to meet certain criteria. I am not a lawyer (but having photograpy as a hobby kinda forces you to into the subject a bit) so I’ll leave the details to them, but in these kinds of discussions I see way too often “it’s fair use, so it’s ok” when it’s not.

[UomoCapra]

2 hours ago, nascarlaser1 said:

Hello!

About a year ago i started a world building project. For those who don't know, world building is exactly what the name implies, its building a fictional world from scratch,similar to what is done for shows or movies like LOTR. I recently realized i could use KSP to build models of my vehicles, not only for visual purposes but also to check if their actually somewhat realistically usable (i have a tendency to design bricks that can magically fly with unicorn dust when i use just paper). However, i was wondering if there were any rules,legal or otherwise, that prevent me from creating screenshots of my creations and attaching them to the article i write about my world. My world is on a different website, so it doesn't violate the forum's RP rules. I tried reading the TOS for KSP but got overwhelmed by it, so if there is information there i probably missed it.

 

Thank you!

Edit to clarify 1 thing i forgot: The world itself is in no way linked to KSP, I just like using KSP to model my vehicles so its easier to visualize then just words.

Hey @nascarlaser1

We cannot officially endorse your project, but as long as you're not profiting from it while you're using KSP assets, you wouldn't be breaking any rules. 

Cheers!

[nascarlaser1]

Just now, UomoCapra said:

Hey @nascarlaser1

We cannot officially endorse your project, but as long as you're not profiting from it while you're using KSP assets, you wouldn't be breaking any rules. 

Cheers!

oh ok thxs! Im not profiting at all (am legally too young to even if i wanted to),but thank you!

[Snark]

Moving to Kerbal Network, since this isn't about the game itself.

[steuben]

48 minutes ago, nascarlaser1 said:

Thxs! So once i have PNG i dont need further editing? (srry for the broken record just want to be sure i fully understand before i screw up something 

Worst you'll do is tie your computer into such knots that you'll have to format and reinstall... which given what you're working with would be truly impressive.

Need further editing... well it depends on what you will do with them. If you are just using them for your 'verse bible then probably not. Anything else, is your call.

[nascarlaser1]

Just now, steuben said:

Worst you'll do is tie your computer into such knots that you'll have to format and reinstall... which given what you're working with would be truly impressive.

Need further editing... well it depends on what you will do with them. If you are just using them for your 'verse bible then probably not. Anything else, is your call.

okie thxs! Im just using it for the universe bible for the little picture next to the article (think of a website similar to wikipedia)

[nascarlaser1]

One question i almost forgot and that got lost in the messages:

If i were to use mods, i assume i'd have to check each mod's license and/or ask the mod creator individually as well? Right now my plan is pure stock,but i dont know if that will change. i know @steubenhad mentioned mod parts related to my earlier question.

[StrandedonEarth]

Edit: I'm told I was wrong....

Edited July 11, 2019 by StrandedonEarth

[nascarlaser1]

51 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

This is the key. Again, as long as you're not making money from it, then using KSP assets or mod assets should be "fair use"

And that was what I thought and was going to post (with an "I'm just an amateur" disclaimer), but that quote makes it official. Copyright law only applies if you're making money with other peoples' assets. Just like I've had no complaints about using AC/DC songs in my KSP music videos. No making money, no worries.

Even if i wanted to make money off my work (which i dont,I just really enjoy making my own world but have trouble describing things) Im too young to legally be able to, so thankfully thats not a worry 

[Kerbart]

2 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

This is the key. Again, as long as you're not making money from it, then using KSP assets or mod assets should be "fair use"

And that was what I thought and was going to post (with an "I'm just an amateur" disclaimer), but that quote makes it official. Copyright law only applies if you're making money with other peoples' assets. Just like I've had no complaints about using AC/DC songs in my KSP music videos. No making money, no worries.

No. No. No.

Please don’t spread misinformation, this is exactly what I meant earlier when I said “claiming fair use doesn’t make it fair use.”

• It’s ok when you’re not profiting from in because you have explicit permission from Squad to do so. Fair use has nothing to do with it—and this would hardly be a case of fair use to begin with.
• Not making profit is not the criterium for Fair Use. Fair Use is intended to cover “copyright infringement” as “collateral damage”. Kennedy gets shot, and a newspaper uses a photo of that event without permission—that is not fair use, but copyright infringement. Another newspaper writes an article and publishes the same picture to show what the lawsuit is about—now it’s fair use, because it’s not a picture of the assassination but an illustration of what the lawsuit is about.
• Copyright infringement is very much independent of whether you’re making money from it or not. Do you think it’s legal to copy KSP from a friend and not pay for it? Of course not, even though neither of you is making no money on that deal—it’s still not legal. Making money has nothing to do with whether it’s copyright infringement or not—having permission from the copyright holder (or not) does.

[StrandedonEarth]

29 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

No. No. No.

Please don’t spread misinformation, this is exactly what I meant earlier when I said “claiming fair use doesn’t make it fair use.”

• It’s ok when you’re not profiting from in because you have explicit permission from Squad to do so. Fair use has nothing to do with it—and this would hardly be a case of fair use to begin with.
• Not making profit is not the criterium for Fair Use. Fair Use is intended to cover “copyright infringement” as “collateral damage”. Kennedy gets shot, and a newspaper uses a photo of that event without permission—that is not fair use, but copyright infringement. Another newspaper writes an article and publishes the same picture to show what the lawsuit is about—now it’s fair use, because it’s not a picture of the assassination but an illustration of what the lawsuit is about.
• Copyright infringement is very much independent of whether you’re making money from it or not. Do you think it’s legal to copy KSP from a friend and not pay for it? Of course not, even though neither of you is making no money on that deal—it’s still not legal. Making money has nothing to do with whether it’s copyright infringement or not—having permission from the copyright holder (or not) does.

Thanks for the clarification; law is certainly not my area. As for the third point, I consider that to be outright (intellectual property?) theft.

I was mainly speaking towards using/publishing images or music "for fun" with no intention of making money from it. No damages to sue for, mainly free publicity for those affected. As long as proper credit is given to the sources.

[Kerbart]

40 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Thanks for the clarification; law is certainly not my area. As for the third point, I consider that to be outright (intellectual property?) theft.

I was mainly speaking towards using/publishing images or music "for fun" with no intention of making money from it. No damages to sue for, mainly free publicity for those affected. As long as proper credit is given to the sources.

Oh, from a moral perspective I agree with you 100%, and it’s nice to see Squad not rabidly defending their copyright as some companies do*. The letter of the law is a different story though. Twitch mutes your audio in recordings if copyrighted material is played in the background, regardless of if you’re making money or not.

* Copyright, not trademark. Trademark needs to be defended or it’s considered “abandoned.” But I digress.

Edited July 11, 2019 by Kerbart
Where did the asterisk go?

[Pecan]

18 hours ago, nascarlaser1 said:

What exactly would i need to do in order to make them original works? I don't know of any image processing software (or even what that means). Also, if i built a creation and took a screenshot of it,wouldn't automatically be considered original works since its 100% my build?

You've had some very good answers here, including specific 'go ahead' from UomoCapra so you don't need to edit any pictures to satisfy them.  Just in case it helps in the future here are some things to look out for:

1.  The devil is in the detail.  While many companies might not mind you using the 'shape' of their 3d models check the textures carefully.  For obvious reasons company and game logos - such as the default KSP flag - are much more likely to cause objections.  This is why a wire-frame model such as from vessel viewer is generally more acceptable.  Kronal Vessel Viewer (https://spacedock.info/mod/1092/Kronal Vessel Viewer Continued), which I used, makes excellent 'exploded' 2d-views of rocket designs so is excellent for both displaying the construction and hiding the texture details.  (That's actually the mod I was thinking of rather than wire-frame vessel viewer).  Very specific imagery, like Kerbals themselves, can almost certainly not be used without permission - which is within the terms of the statement you have from UomoCapra.  Otherwise they'd be very hard to edit in such a way that they weren't still obviously Squad's Kerbals.

2.  Pay respect to get respect.  If you're flying rockets from bottom to toilet (*gasp* you said you're too young, stop it!), or creating a similarly negative or insulting image, it shouldn't be a surprise that a company is more likely to disapprove.  Keep in mind the impression of a brand that your own work is likely to imply/project.

3.  Every product and company is different.  Apart from the different laws in various countries some people/organisations will welcome wider exposure as free publicity, others will 'manage' their branding very tightly and hardly allow any use of their property (Disney are known to be extremely litigious).  Note that copyright owners are required, by law, to protect themselves with certain forms of words ("We cannot officially endorse your project" and "you wouldn't be breaking any rules" in Squad's statement are examples).  Understand that it's not personal, the statement they make for one person also has to protect them against everyone else, who might not be as nice as you.

Beyond that the borders between "IP theft", "derivative work" and "original work" are extremely imprecise I'm afraid and differ around the world.  Propensity to give or withold permission is even more variable.

IANAL but I am an author.

[nascarlaser1]

2 hours ago, Pecan said:

You've had some very good answers here, including specific 'go ahead' from UomoCapra so you don't need to edit any pictures to satisfy them.  Just in case it helps in the future here are some things to look out for:

1.  The devil is in the detail.  While many companies might not mind you using the 'shape' of their 3d models check the textures carefully.  For obvious reasons company and game logos - such as the default KSP flag - are much more likely to cause objections.  This is why a wire-frame model such as from vessel viewer is generally more acceptable.  Kronal Vessel Viewer (https://spacedock.info/mod/1092/Kronal Vessel Viewer Continued), which I used, makes excellent 'exploded' 2d-views of rocket designs so is excellent for both displaying the construction and hiding the texture details.  (That's actually the mod I was thinking of rather than wire-frame vessel viewer).  Very specific imagery, like Kerbals themselves, can almost certainly not be used without permission - which is within the terms of the statement you have from UomoCapra.  Otherwise they'd be very hard to edit in such a way that they weren't still obviously Squad's Kerbals.

2.  Pay respect to get respect.  If you're flying rockets from bottom to toilet (*gasp* you said you're too young, stop it!), or creating a similarly negative or insulting image, it shouldn't be a surprise that a company is more likely to disapprove.  Keep in mind the impression of a brand that your own work is likely to imply/project.

3.  Every product and company is different.  Apart from the different laws in various countries some people/organisations will welcome wider exposure as free publicity, others will 'manage' their branding very tightly and hardly allow any use of their property (Disney are known to be extremely litigious).  Note that copyright owners are required, by law, to protect themselves with certain forms of words ("We cannot officially endorse your project" and "you wouldn't be breaking any rules" in Squad's statement are examples).  Understand that it's not personal, the statement they make for one person also has to protect them against everyone else, who might not be as nice as you.

Beyond that the borders between "IP theft", "derivative work" and "original work" are extremely imprecise I'm afraid and differ around the world.  Propensity to give or withold permission is even more variable.

IANAL but I am an author.

Ok thxs! for to make sure i don't include any logos and stuff I'm making custom flags/decal based off my world, so that way its 100% logo free even if i use full blown screenshots (unlikely). I'm not sure what you mean about a toilet? But my stuff is not going to offensive, just things like planes, rovers/trucks, and maybe helicopters (if i get an answer about mods). I'm not totally sure what the "endorse your project" part means (@UomoCapra,could you explain?), but i was mostly looking for the "you wouldn't be breaking any rules" part.

I'll definitely use at least the Wire-frame model, as well as probably Kronal vessel viewer. I may use 1-2 regular screenshots but as stated earlier, this is currently unlikely, as my main goal is to just get a basic image to say "This is what it looks like,ignore my horrible wordie-ness that probably makes no sense", as well as making sure my vehicles are within the realm of reason on the "will this even fly" chart (which doesn't require pictures at all).

[nascarlaser1]

Also 1 final thing before i forget to type it: I'm not 100% certain i'll do any of what I'm,planning,i just felt that it was better to get permission before putting too much consideration into my plan,rather then spell out my entire plan and then find out it was not allowed.

[Pecan]

> Logos - you're ok with those, from the statement UomoCapra made but, yes, in general it's better to be safe than sorry so using custom ones is better.
> Toilet - I was light-heartedly pointing-out that it's not nice to make a company's pictures look like poo! (Again, just an 'in general' permissions thing.  Not imply that you were or would).
> Endorsement - if a company 'endorses' your video/comic/book/whatever it gets their 'official' blessing.  It's somewhat like their mod recommendations where they are saying "we recognise this as a good and worthy thing".  NOT endorsing something is an example of where a company has to protect itself by saying they are officially nothing to do with it even if some of it looks like their product.  Obviously, Squad haven't seen what you're doing so they can't straight-out say they approve of it although if it becomes terribly famous in the future there's nothing to stop them then looking at it and saying 'yes, we like it'.  As always, think of the terrible legal things that *could* happen to Squad/Take-Two in the worst case.  Someone, somewhere, sometime might find something in your work that they don't like and sues them because they 'authorised' the whatever.
> Mods - yes, you're right about needing permission from them too but those are usually much easier to obtain or, at least, the process and who to talk to is much clearer.  In most cases the mod licence gives sufficiently blanket permission (although it's always nice to ask; mod developers like to know that people value their stuff enough to use it).

> Plan - You are doing entirely the right thing and we can only hope that you do follow-through with your plans.  You can't get permission unless you have the idea and you can't complete without the permission and you'll probably have to go around the circle several times as the implementation changes the idea, which needs different permissions, which affects the implementation, etc. etc.  It's how anything gets created *smile*.  Have fun.

Edited July 12, 2019 by Pecan

[nascarlaser1]

53 minutes ago, Pecan said:

> Logos - you're ok with those, from the statement UomoCapra made but, yes, in general it's better to be safe than sorry so using custom ones is better.
> Toilet - I was light-heartedly pointing-out that it's not nice to make a company's pictures look like poo! (Again, just an 'in general' permissions thing.  Not imply that you were or would).
> Endorsement - if a company 'endorses' your video/comic/book/whatever it gets their 'official' blessing.  It's somewhat like their mod recommendations where they are saying "we recognise this as a good and worthy thing".  NOT endorsing something is an example of where a company has to protect itself by saying they are officially nothing to do with it even if some of it looks like their product.  Obviously, Squad haven't seen what you're doing so they can't straight-out say they approve of it although if it becomes terribly famous in the future there's nothing to stop them then looking at it and saying 'yes, we like it'.  As always, think of the terrible legal things that *could* happen to Squad/Take-Two in the worst case.  Someone, somewhere, sometime might find something in your work that they don't like and sues them because they 'authorised' the whatever.
> Mods - yes, you're right about needing permission from them too but those are usually much easier to obtain or, at least, the process and who to talk to is much clearer.  In most cases the mod licence gives sufficiently blanket permission (although it's always nice to ask; mod developers like to know that people value their stuff enough to use it).

> Plan - You are doing entirely the right thing and we can only hope that you do follow-through with your plans.  You can't get permission unless you have the idea and you can't complete without the permission and you'll probably have to go around the circle several times as the implementation changes the idea, which needs different permissions, which affects the implementation, etc. etc.  It's how anything gets created *smile*.  Have fun.

thanks!!

[The Dressian Exploder]

On 7/10/2019 at 3:35 PM, nascarlaser1 said:

world building

Magrathea confirmed.