Content Suggestion The Change of the 173 Model

[Fellowchum]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
My suggestion asks for the change of the 173 model currently used within both SCP US and UK servers.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
This suggestion hasn't been made before as far as I can see.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):

• A new interest in the SCP due to its model change
• Possibly avoiding any possible legal troubles that may appear
• Possibly a new creative possibility if the team wishes to make a new model from scratch

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:

• Possible disapproval of the model if its made from scratch

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
I believe my suggestion should be accepted mainly due to the fact that the original creator "Izumi Kato", has copyrighted the statue. Because of this copyright any who follow the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license could possibly face legal trouble if used for commercial purposes without permission. Now I'm not very knowledgeable on such licenses nor do I know if the server follows these licenses. So if that isn't convincing enough I think the other reason the model should be changed which I brought in my third positive is that perhaps the team wants to make something new off of the 173 model. Just as SCP: Secret Lab or SCP: 4K did, they could make something new. Lastly I think it should also be changed as to a kindness to the creator. The creator of the statue created it in a group of other statues for an entirely different purpose than the way we see it now. Though amazing to see what people can do with such an image to create a story I think just as the SCP wiki did I think we should stop using the original model and make something new.

 

[Dark Soldier]

Do you have any workshops link

 

[Fellowchum]

Do you have any workshops link

I can find a few. But I'm not betting that they'll be used. If anything maybe inspiration.
Workshop Links:https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2098462118&searchtext=173
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2819496247&searchtext=173 (This one is just entities not models, does contain the original thing as well)

 

[dougdougjones]

-SUPPORT

Don’t you dare suggest we take peanut away.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

I get the reasoning - I think the biggest reason most people dislike moving away from the original 173 is that all the 'new takes' on it that I've seen like in SL and such, kinda try too hard to go into the 'creepy'/'horror' factors - But IMO, the original 173 has like a kinda "creepy-cute" vibe to it. Ish. If you look at the original with that in mind, you can probably see what I'm talking about. I think any redesign that is made with that in mind and is able to successfully capture the original feel as best as possible would be something I'd back and may also be more widely accepted by the community than something like say, SL or remake's reimaginings of 173.
+Soft Support

 

[BanishedDemoness]

+ Support
Keep things CC 3.0 complient. Don't steal art.

 

[Kevin Ki]

-Support

Bro doesn't know his 173 lore

Izumi Kato (Creator of 173 look) Gave Foundation Permission - Undertow Games Forum

"I won’t complain about you and SCP foundation using my sculpture's image unless it is used for commercial purposes. However, I plan to take legal measures to demand an injunction if someone uses this image for commercial purposes."

173 is free to play, so it's fine.

 

[Driver]

if it ain't broken then don't fix it

 

[BanishedDemoness]

-Support

Bro doesn't know his 173 lore

Izumi Kato (Creator of 173 look) Gave Foundation Permission - Undertow Games Forum

"I won’t complain about you and SCP foundation using my sculpture's image unless it is used for commercial purposes. However, I plan to take legal measures to demand an injunction if someone uses this image for commercial purposes."

173 is free to play, so it's fine.

From the SCP liccencing guide
> Game Developers: You are free to create and share videogames based on SCP, but you must comply with all aspects of the license as it relates to software. That means releasing the work under CC-by-SA-3.0,
>Artists: f you create a piece of art based on an SCP and share it publicly, ie via deviantart, it needs to be licensed under CC

The current model of 173 cannot be under CC 3.0 and thus should be changed

 

[Kevin Ki]

From the SCP liccencing guide
> Game Developers: You are free to create and share videogames based on SCP, but you must comply with all aspects of the license as it relates to software. That means releasing the work under CC-by-SA-3.0,
>Artists: f you create a piece of art based on an SCP and share it publicly, ie via deviantart, it needs to be licensed under CC

The current model of 173 cannot be under CC 3.0 and thus should be changed

Tbh, I do not care about some random SCP licensing guide that spelt licensing wrong. Also it don't matter when the artist themselves said they were okay with free use and have since not pressed any charges against anyone using the image based statue, including SCP:CB who arguably made profit off of it or the many channels selling 173 plushes.

Also, since the model itself wasn't made by the artist it falls into a greyzone. It's why nintendo can't pull down every mario/pokemon model, because not all of them are ripped from a game.

Finally, the new 'accepted' 173 model looks like ass.