| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 686 |
Handling recracks, sids, etc
How about adding linking for sources of things.
If something is a re-crack you should be able to link the original work.
If a SID is used in a demo or other production and ripped from a game or elsewhere, you should be able to link the original work.
This would solve a lot of problems by making it clear that something is a derivative work or uses the assets created by someone else, with or without their permission. This would also solve the problems of incorrect credits being assigned to productions that use other assets or derivative works. Assigning credits to people who had nothing to do with the production is not a proper credit. |
|
| |
Fred
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 285 |
It's pretty common to credit artists even if they are not involved in a release directly. Most C64 demos do when SID tunes are ripped and used.
When you e.g. make a video and use a song from someone without permission, you credit this as well, right? If you make use of someone's assets, it's common to credit this even without permission.
The copyright field in the SID tune makes it clear what the original is. Also the cross references on CSDb is very useful to find out where the SID is published first.
You cannot link SIDs to the original work on CSDb, in case of originals from commercial stuff, since they are not allowed here, only scene related stuff.
I disagree with your "incorrect credits / not proper credit" statement, it's just how we document things here at CSDb and it makes sense to me. |
| |
F7sus4
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 117 |
What I think Fungus had in mind was to allow the distinction between productions being author's original work and/or productions that he has actively collaborated in from productions that have his/her work borrowed/used (when an author is associated to production he didn't intend to work on nor agreed to it).
It obviously makes sense from the author's POV (and I know some people are unhappy with their CSDb credit list getting "trashed" with seemingly random productions), but it's still impossible to disagree that the credit is due.
(I guess, it would also be impossible to retroactively reassign all the current productions' status based on the nature of artist's involvement, even if CSDb wanted to go that way from now on - that would also lead to quite obvious standardization issue when it comes to database cataloging criteria.) |
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1932 |
The introduction of some kind of "original release" flag has internally been discussed and found wide spread agreement.
Ok, some game musicians would drop to zero releases instantly on such a display. Makes at least me quite unsure on what to display instead. HVSC is not reverse indexed it appears :( |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 686 |
I'm interested in accuracy, rather than "how you do it". There's always flaws in the system. So I'm trying to present solutions instead of just bitching about them.
I know I for one, don't want to be credited in someone else's recrack of my work. I can pretty much assure no one else does either. Burglar made that point in another thread. Such things are wholly inaccurate and misleading.
If I made SIDs, I wouldn't want to be credited as having any involvement with a production that I wasn't involved in either. There's a distinction from an asset used and direct involvement. "sids used in this production" is much more accurate for such cases.
No SID musician I'm aware of other than Rambones has had direct involvement in HVSC for example. So crediting them is silly and not entirely truthful. If you catch my meaning here. |
| |
Fred
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 285 |
It's valuable information, if you like it or not.
Your idea of involvement only works when you made something specific for a release that is not reused.
If you e.g. made a logo or character set for a group and that group used it in several releases, were you then involved in all those releases? I don't think so. It's the same when people stole your character set and used it. Still you are credited for all those releases since you made it and that is valuable information.
It's also very hard to find out who is actually involved in some releases especially in old releases when CSDb didn't exist. Sometimes musicians made a tune and were not involved in any release and their tune just got used. Of course they need to be credited, they made the tune.
When I see a release and I see a credit who made the character set or graphics (even if that person was not involved or part of the group) is valuable to me. Removing this info would be a mistake since it is not always mentioned in the release itself.
Adding a flag if something is the original is a nice to have but that doesn't mean we should not credit graphics, character sets and SIDs anymore. If we decide to not do this anymore then I think we make a huge mistake.
CSDb is about documenting the scene and all information we can gather is useful information, including the idea to know someone's involvement.
You said: "I know I for one, don't want to be credited in someone else's recrack of my work. I can pretty much assure no one else does either.".
CSDb let you see how the scene is (re)using your work, when and where it is used. This is why CSDb is made. This can only be accomplished when credits are filled in. You may not like that but remember, CSDb is not a release platform. |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 487 |
In terms of cracks I could imagine some kind of "Based on" link/relation maybe with a pre-defined selectable attribute e.g. "Import of", "Recrack of", "Trainer of". With that link you could build up chains like:
Crack <- Trainer of Crack <- Import of Trainer <- Recrack of Import
With this you could also display related releases from the base releases e.g. for USA/Canadian cracks which were often base for a lot of imports, or untrained crack which were base for trainer versions.
May also make sense for demos and mags which were spread/imported/fixed by others. |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2240 |
To me it doesn't matter where the original crack info of re-crack is mentioned (extra flag, trivia, comments) but I find it insufficient to set the flag and not _somehow/somewhere_ tell re-crack of which release like here Spelunker
With unauthorized use of music I'd be fine if we keep mentioning the HVSC .SID path and stop crediting but it would mean a lot of work to undo what has been the practice for about two decades now...
about the "etc" - loaders? What really made me frown a little was when people started to give code credits in Unofficial Tiny SID Compo 2022 when they used trackers they did not code on their own... |
| |
F7sus4
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 117 |
Quoting TheRykWhat really made me frown a little was when people started to give code credits in Unofficial Tiny SID Compo 2022 when they used trackers they did not code on their own...
Isn't there some sort of widespread inconsistency regarding this subject, anyway?
The coder of any tracker does not get the credit with music releases (unless he/she coded something extra for that particular music piece), but the coder of the loader actually does (yay Krill's lovely profile).
Yes, people "got used to it", but if we put the CSDb's own custom aside, there's very little logical explanation for it to be that way. (And inb4: "B-b-b-ut loader is an integral part of the demo and it utilizes someone elses code". Well, so is the music player, except it doesn't load data, but bleep-blops the music out of your SID unit.) :-) |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2240 |
I absolutely agree, it doesn't make sense at all and some rather random tradition is all there is to explain it - which doesn't make it any logical or consistent. We don't credit Zagon for any exomized release or CRT for any gfx release done with PixCen either. |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
My 2 cents, crediting loaders (and trackers or packers and other below the surface frameworks) isn't really helpful and clutters up the db.
Common sense applied, if someone did a remix or hommage of a famous painting, the artist would get credit with a side mention of the reference work. But nobody would credit the brand of the canvas, the colours or the pens used. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Quote:ut nobody would credit the brand of the canvas, the colours or the pens used.
actually there were quite some demos that did credit all the tools (and their makers) |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2240 |
Groepaz: Yeah, nothing wrong with people DOING that, but that doesn't mean CSDb bothers to store any such details.
I vaguely remember trackmos with credits parts even telling whether they used Relaunch or Notepad++ as an editor which Crossassembler, which cruncher and what not...
But most of these super-detailled credits are even kept apart from the actual release in an extra file - maybe because no one cares/everyone knows which tools and their authors are great anyway, so hardly anyone out there wants to read about it.
Current agenda just ain't consistent, but your criticism also ain't always consistent. You can't say: Rob Hubbard had nothing to do with the release/wasn't asked, so music credits are stupid, and at the same time defend Loader credits - pick a f--ing line :P |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Where did i defend loader credits? I just replied to Steppe, stating a fact - no more no less. |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
Quote: Quote:ut nobody would credit the brand of the canvas, the colours or the pens used.
actually there were quite some demos that did credit all the tools (and their makers)
Sure, these tools are often mentioned in the end credits, just like in most movies end credits (to use an analogy again). I was just saying that it's not especially useful for the CSDb credits fields. |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 487 |
I remember crediting loader started in demos in the 90s. The first credits I remember was to K.M./Taboo, which then was continued by others. |
