Before it's too late ...

[eViLe_eAgLe]

Thanks for telling me that.. Ill make sure to not use it anymore!

For those of you who haven't found it yet.. These host alot of the stuff on the Dundjinni forums.
http://www.dundjinni.com/forums/foru...TID=11001&PN=1

[eViLe_eAgLe]

Time to raid the forums?

[Mark Oliva]

For those of you who haven't found it yet.. These host alot of the stuff on the Dundjinni forums.
http://www.dundjinni.com/forums/foru...TID=11001&PN=1

Thanks for adding that! I completely forgot to mention Sendorian's good archives.

[Kepli]

It's good to see we are not the only ones worried about the DJ site. And good to see you found the archives others build and are still maintaining. This way the art won't disappear.

We (me and other webmasters) are working on this and will keep you all posted.

Kepli

[Mark Oliva]

It's good to see we are not the only ones worried about the DJ site. And good to see you found the archives others build and are still maintaining. This way the art won't disappear. We (me and other webmasters) are working on this and will keep you all posted.Kepli

Great. There are a lot of folks who don't want only the art but also Dundjinni to stick around!

[Redrobes]

Just askin - what is the fundamental reason that the web site might not be around any more ? Is it the cost of maintaining the site or is it just a hunch that its somewhat imminently in danger that it will expire ? Does anyone have access to the full web site files not just the art in it ? If it popped off then could a new home be found for it ? Who is the current rightful owner of the site. I think something more substantial than an all out pilfering of the art is required here. I would also say that if those art files were creative commons then the lack of CSUAC, SMAC and web site art issue could be easily prevented.

[Mark Oliva]

Just askin - what is the fundamental reason that the web site might not be around any more ?

As far as this thread is concerned, my supposition based on the fact that whoever is paying for the site is giving us the service gratis. Dundjinni (R) no longer is on the market producing income for the site owner. That, plus sporadic site reliability in the past year tells me that the further existence of the site is questionable. As you will see below, the question of moving the material elsewhere if dundjinni.com goes off the air poses immense problems.

Is it the cost of maintaining the site or is it just a hunch that its somewhat imminently in danger that it will expire ? Does anyone have access to the full web site files not just the art in it ? If it popped off then could a new home be found for it ? Who is the current rightful owner of the site.

Kepli needs to answer that part of your query. He's on the inside.

I think something more substantial than an all out pilfering of the art is required here. I would also say that if those art files were creative commons then the lack of CSUAC, SMAC and web site art issue could be easily prevented.

Right. Except the files are not Creative Commons. They're everything under the sun including personal use only. That was Cecil Solomon's great achievement. When he put together the CSUAC, he actually contacted and got the necessary permission from all of the owners. To get that permission, he had to write a proprietary license that is relatively open and non-restrictive but that also prohibits reposting the CSUAC or its contents on other sites.

I wouldn't view the SMAC as being pilfered. The person who created it had noble intentions. He didn't realize that he couldn't do what he was doing. Once that became clear, he pulled the SMAC material immediately.

Getting permission to use the content - which now is more than 100 times the size of the old CSUAC - would be impossible. Many of the earlier owners no longer take part in the Dundjinni forums. Contacting them would be impossible. Some would refuse, Our group probably would too, and we have more than 1,000 items in the forums. We wouldn't refuse just to be stubborn or to be contrary. Some of our material, because of third party rights, can be released only under the OGL. Our attorney has warned us several times to use only the OGL and not to use mixed licensing. This issue really is complex.