Reactions about 'Official stance on how ...'

[Tobi]

Reactions to this can go in this thread...

Some notes beforehand:

• Insulting others in relation to licensing matters may result in an immediate one week ban.
• This post is in NO way a legally binding text, it is NOT an addendum/exception to the GNU GPL.
• This post is only a clarification of an opinion a number of Spring developers share.
• This post does not oblige us to take action against those not respecting this opinion.

[Regret]

LOL 1ST POST

[==Troy==]

Very clear description, and I have to completely agree with it. LUA code is GPLed, content can have different license. As it was actually initially intended by GPL.

Moreover, GPL is code-based license, there is alternative license for the artwork, but it is not directly related to GPL, (I can be wrong here). i.e. such licenses as CC (creative commons).

[Forboding Angel]

If you agree, then why are you crapping all over the other thread?

[lurker]

then why are you crapping all over the other thread?

Watercooler_is_not_amused.png (25.16 KiB) Viewed 8530 times

[Argh]

As I'm one of the few people who's argued very seriously about the legal status of the GPL on the engine and its applicability to gamecode here, I just wanted to say that I'm entirely comfortable with the stated policy. I think that legally, the issues may be arguable, but I certainly have no real problem with what's been said, and will adhere to the policy. I think it represents a good compromise about the issues of "mere aggregation", etc., and still allows for commercial uses of the engine, providing anybody ever makes something worth paying for.

The only problem I see here is that if people build commercially valuable code, they may become extremely reluctant to ever release it at all. That said, if they don't, they can't build anything other than private demos, so perhaps that isn't terribly important, except in the realm of shaders and other areas where the GLSL code concerned is more easily portable. I think that's just a tradeoff that must be accepted, though.

I really think that this is the best compromise we could have reached, though. The extremists on both ends may not be entirely happy, but I'm not sure how many of the game developers are still "extreme" at this point, anyhow. Most of us who've been through the many flamewars surrounding these issues know that there aren't any perfect solutions that don't require some pretty far-fetched things to happen- either a big lawsuit with the FSF involved, which could take years, or uniformity among the Spring developers about changing the license.

Neither outcome is likely, so there isn't any good reason to fight about it all the time, tbh.

Therefore, out of respect for the spirit of this statement, I would like to publicly declare the code for Merc Squad / P.U.R.E. to be "fair game" for all game developers to use.

I don't think I ever released the BOS source in public RCs. Please don't make a GPL source request, I don't have that exact code any more. The current BOS source will be included in future releases of the game. The new code's better anyhow, tbh, so just be patient, if you wanted to use my basic walk-cycles, the fast suspension script, the sound stuff, etc., etc., many of which isn't really available elsewhere, other than a few things in IW.

So, feel free to use any of my code you like.

My content(bitmaps, meshes, sounds, and other artistic works), however, remains (C) to my group unless otherwise specified (i.e., NanoBlobs), or to the respective authors, in the case where we're using works distributed under CC-SA, etc. I forbid redistribution of said works without my written consent, except in the cases of work released under CC-SA, where you must adhere to the License of said works. But if it's not documented in the game's documentation as a GPL-friendly license, and you want to redistribute it in a GPL context (for example, Linux distros) that's not legal.

Just making sure that's clear to everybody.

I'm just about the only person left with (C) notices on code atm, so I thought a statement to make it entirely clear that I have no intention to fight this policy, provided that the status quo ante in regards to "mere aggregation" and content within a game distribution is maintained. I figured it would be useful in moving this conversation forward, if nobody thinks I'm holding to an ambiguous position here, or intend to ever have a big legal fight about this.

[lurker]

I don't have that exact code any more.

No version control?

Why forbid distribution of the unmodified game archive? I suggest you at least add an exception for the spring torrent system.

[Argh]

No version control?

Not really, no. I'm fairly seat-of-the-pants when it comes to day-to-day development, tbh, but I'm sole dictator, that's not much a problem- if I'm too stupid to know what I did six months ago, and too stupid to document it, I deserve to suffer

I keep a lot of backup copies of everything, though

Why forbid distribution of the unmodified game archive? I suggest you at least add an exception for the spring torrent system.

1. I am not the copyright holder for everything in P.U.R.E., so I can't really do that, when we're talking about stuff like a distro.

2. I am not comfortable with people torrenting P.U.R.E. at all. That's redistribution without me knowing how many copies are really out there, etc., which are the numbers I'd want to have if I decided to investigate going commercial, and wanted to have something solid to talk about, in terms of real interest, etc.

Moreover, that's a very ambiguous area to grant an exception to- it'd be very hard to prove piracy was occuring, if people "merely" assembled content from the torrented version with GPL source in future versions, unless I put unique content into every one.

That said, I do so every time, not as a policy thing, but just because the game keeps evolving... so maybe it's possible. I'll think about that one.

[lurker]

it'd be very hard to prove piracy was occuring, if people "merely" assembled content from the torrented version with GPL source in future versions, unless I put unique content into every one.

I'm not sure what you mean here. If you're saying people could use GPL source form a commercial release and artistic content from an older release, that sounds like something easily done in a noninfringing mutator.

And don't think for a second pure is going to go unregistered in SD...

[Argh]

it'd be very hard to prove piracy was occuring, if people "merely" assembled content from the torrented version with GPL source in future versions, unless I put unique content into every one.

I have no idea what you mean here.

And don't think for a second pure is going to go unregistered in SD...

Well, if I release a version that's content-complete, then I release a commercial version that's the same content-wise, then I'm pretty well hosed, trying prove that piracy is happening. As I said, though, that's probably worrying about a non-issue. I add new content all the time, so it's not like the hash will ever be the same.

And don't think for a second pure is going to go unregistered in SD...

It's not SD, it's torrents outside that box that concern me. I mean... once it's seeded, people can use any torrent client, correct? Or is it just a fancy linking system where ultimately it's all SD bandwidth, and downloads are tracked?

[lurker]

Any torrent client, yes, though you have to connect to the system to request seeding. See the edit about mutators from before you made your post.

[Argh]

I'm totally fine with mutators that don't touch content, tbh, legal or not. I'd be thrilled if people used that opportunity to better-balance the game post-release. It's too bad people regard mutators as being a pain in the arse right now, mainly because a mutator isn't an automated thing that you can get by joining a "mutated" game. Hmm, sounds like a SpringLobby feature request...

But that doesn't really address my main issues with the torrent system. It's fairly important that I have a pretty clear idea how many copies are really out there atm, whether we decide to go commercial or not- if nothing else, this goes on my resume. Meh, for a "demo" or a final free release, I guess it's not terribly important, though. I'll keep thinking about it, I'm sure there's a compromise solution.

[lurker]

Would be nice if it tracked downloads.

But what I'm saying is a mutator taking your commercial GPL code could be the same as the full commercial mod. You could even hack the crc32 so that you could play with people having the commercial mod.

[BrainDamage]

you can track downloads from torrents just fine, connect to the swarm with any torrent client and it will inform about who's downloading, number of complete downloads etc...

[lurker]

Will they send percentage updates or finished notifications to everyone during the short time from finshing a download and shutting off the torrent? And isn't that a bit of effort to script a torrent client to track every person that downloads and then leaves?

[Argh]

you can track downloads from torrents just fine, connect to the swarm with any torrent client and it will inform about who's downloading, number of complete downloads etc...

Hmm. Food for thought, there. I don't suppose anybody's invented a way for a application to do that and put up a web page showing who's gotten what? I can't very well check the swarm on a regular basis, for the same reasons I can't be in the Lobby a lot- lack of time, and it's one more thing I need to look at. If the swarm ever empties, other than the original seeder, is that information still known? I.E., if I checked it once a week, would that actually work?

@lurker: There's nothing that can be done about serious attempts to avoid detection of a violation, no. It's like everything else concerning security of the engine.

I'm not terribly worried about that, though. Either it becomes a commonplace issue, because somebody decides to hack Spring to do various cheating things, and then gives out a bunch of copies, and Spring gets fixed... or it's like 5 leet coder guys who did it just to see it.

Either way, if we go commercial... there's nothing I can actually do anything about it... and I'd just have to trust in people's good natures. It's always that way if you're an indie game, anyhow- piracy-prevention's ultimately pretty futile.

Also, just wanted to say... uh, sorry about the derail, if anybody wants to talk about Tobi's post more.

[lurker]

@lurker: There's nothing that can be done about serious attempts to avoid detection of a violation, no. It's like everything else concerning security of the engine.

What violation? That's my question. I have legitimate-new-GPL-code, I have legitimate-old-PURE, I mutator the first onto the second... I mean it's a jerk move, but what does it violate?

And don't worry about the off-topic, the general idea was to make a discussion thread, isolated away from the important post, and ignore it.

[Argh]

What violation? That's my question.

Uh... taking the SDZs and putting them on the torrent system via SD, basically.

Stuff outside the Lobby, I can't control and won't worry about, beyond the obvious (websites offering the game outside my distribution agreements, etc.- I've already had to deal with this hassle, because of the not-subtle pressure put on me by ModDB to keep everything there so that they're the focal point of traffic, not that I've achieved anything like perfection. The damn game's available on at least 50 websites around the world, thankfully mainly buried in archives by now, but they weren't pleased by how much it was getting mirrored... at all.)

I just don't want to see open piracy facilitated via abuse of SD, is all.

I mean, it's me we're talking about, there are various people out there who'd do it just because, nevermind the other people on the team who would get hurt.

[lurker]

So you're not worried about legitimate moochers? k.

[Argh]

So you're not worried about legitimate moochers? k.

If people are using SD for legitimate purposes, which I assume 99.999% of it is, of course not. And I'd certainly be interested in torrenting stuff like new map releases and official patches.