# Reference — Free asset licences, and what they actually permit
+
# Asset Sources and Licensing
-
**REF104 · r2 · 2026-09-06 · Reference Researcher · Reference, not a design proposal. Not legal advice, not asset approval.**
-
r2 rebuilds §4 on Valve's own Steamworks documentation — the gap r1 flagged as its own weakest material,
-
closed by the [External Critic](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) and re-verified here — and removes
-
r1's project-specific disclosure conclusion, per
-
[PMR003](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews/PMR003). r1 is page history. Written because [Design Document r9 §14](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document) now carries a
-
live asset decision, and the [Brief](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Brief) requires that *"any shortlisted asset needs
-
its actual source, creator, terms, and intended use recorded."* This page records what the terms mean.
-
Sources read: [Design Document](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document) §§14, 17 and its asset-check record,
**I read the definitions above on Valve's page; I did not verify that change history** and it is not
-
repeated here as fact. Whatever the history, the definitions quoted above are what the page says now.
-
-
> **No conclusion is drawn here about this project.** r1 ended this section by reasoning from
-
> [Brief](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Brief) D009 to what the project would have to declare.
-
> [PMR003](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews/PMR003) ruled that out and is right: **the no-AI-art rule alone
-
> does not decide whether all eventual game or store content requires disclosure.** The rule covers art;
-
> the survey asks about content of every kind that ships and is consumed by players, and what will
-
> eventually ship is not yet decided. No platform-submission decision is due now — the survey is answered
-
> on a build that does not exist and cannot exist before the owner opens the development gate. The
-
> definitions are recorded here so they are on hand when that question is real; applying them is not this
-
> page's job and not this role's.
-
-
## 5. What the Brief's record needs, per asset
-
-
The Brief asks for *"source, creator, terms, and intended use."* From §2 and §3, four additions make that
-
record actually checkable later:
-
-
1. **The licence name *and version*, copied from the asset's own page** — not from the host's general FAQ.
-
OpenGameArt is per-asset; a site-level statement proves nothing about one file.
-
2. **A direct URL to the asset page**, and **the date it was read**. Licences on user-upload sites can be
-
edited by the uploader.
-
3. **Whether the intended use is a derivative** (recolour, resize, re-cut). §3.1 is only a problem for
-
derivative use, so recording the intent is what makes the licence answerable.
-
4. **Attribution text prepared at shortlist time**, for any BY row. Attribution is cheap to satisfy on the
-
day and expensive to reconstruct at ship.
-
-
Kenney's pack, as the one asset checked so far, needs only rows 1–3: CC0 requires no attribution, though
-
crediting is normal courtesy and costs nothing.
-
-
---
-
-
## What this page does not claim
-
-
Not legal advice, and not a substitute for the licence texts, which govern. No asset is shortlisted,
-
recommended, downloaded, or assessed for suitability, style or quality — none of which is this role's call.
-
No claim that any pack fits this game. No conclusion about what this project would have to declare to Valve: [PMR003](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews/PMR003) ruled
-
that the no-AI-art rule alone does not settle it, and r1's paragraph doing so is removed. **This page is
-
received as reference work, not as legal guidance, not as asset approval, and not as a platform-submission
-
decision** — none of which is this role's to give. The January 2026 change history in §4 remains unverified
-
and is labelled there. The GPL question in §2 is explicitly left open for a
-
lawyer rather than answered.
+
A source checklist retained from research dated 2026-09-06. Check the actual asset and current terms before relying on a licence; this page approves no asset.
## Sources
-
- [Creative Commons: About CC Licenses](https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/cclicenses/) · [CC0](https://creativecommons.org/public-domain/cc0/)
- [Unity Asset Store Terms of Service and EULA](https://unity.com/legal/as-terms)
-
- Steam AI disclosure, as reported: [Game Developer](https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/valve-tweaks-and-clarifies-ai-disclosure-rules-for-steam) · [VGC](https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/valve-has-significantly-rewritten-steams-rules-for-how-developers-much-disclose-ai-use/) · [GeekWire](https://www.geekwire.com/2024/valve-software-reveals-new-rules-for-ai-powered-game-development-on-steam/)
-
-
## Bookkeeping
-
-
**Method.** Public licence texts and platform terms, fetched read-only on 2026-09-06. Nothing was
-
downloaded, built, prototyped or tested. Kenney's licence and OpenGameArt's licence list were re-fetched
-
independently rather than taken from the Design Document, and both matched what that page recorded.
+
- [Creative Commons licence descriptions](https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/cclicenses/) and [CC0](https://creativecommons.org/public-domain/cc0/).
+
- [OpenGameArt FAQ](https://opengameart.org/content/faq) and [OGA-BY FAQ](https://opengameart.org/content/oga-by-30-faq).
+
- [Unity Asset Store terms and EULA](https://unity.com/legal/as-terms).
+
- [Kenney assets](https://kenney.nl/assets/top-down-shooter), a previously researched source; suitability for the restarted game has not been assessed.
+
- [Steamworks Content Survey](https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/contentsurvey), to consult when eventual shipped content and submission obligations are known.
-
**What r2 changed.** §4 rebuilt on Valve's Steamworks Content Survey page, and r1's project-specific conclusion
-
removed per [PMR003](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews/PMR003). Nothing in §§1–3 or §5 changed.
+
## Record for each candidate
-
**On r1's flagged weakness, now closed.** r1 named §4 as its weakest material because Valve's own page could
-
not be fetched. The [External Critic](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) fetched the Steamworks Content
-
Survey and posted the definitions; I re-fetched the same page and confirmed their quotations are exact
-
before using them. **Flagging weak material in place is what let someone else close it** — worth recording,
-
because it is the second time this pass structure has worked (the wiki editor caught the REF102 heading the
-
same way).
+
Record the direct asset URL, creator, licence name and version, date checked, intended use and modifications, attribution requirements, restrictions, and any cost. Keep a copy of the applicable terms with the asset record when selecting it.
-
**Remaining weakness**, flagged in place: the January 2026 revision history for Steam's AI rules is press-
-
reported and unverified (§4). The definitions themselves are quoted from Valve's page.
+
A host-wide licence description does not settle an individual upload’s terms. Free download, permission for commercial use, permission to modify and permission to redistribute are separate questions. Identify unresolved terms before selecting an asset.
-
**Corrections.** Kill any statement here with a counter-source and it goes. If a lawyer contradicts §2 or
-
§3, the lawyer is right.
+
The project’s approval and art constraints are in the [Owner Brief](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Brief).
