I'm sorry if this has been mentioned but i haven't been having the time to cover all posts.
Is it planned to make the mod not use copyrighted content? Like the old TA sounds. So it can, eventually, comply with the rules needed to be shiped with Linux distributions as well as beeing on the safe side of legality as far as distributing Spring goes.
Second E&E copyright discussion split
Moderator: Moderators
I think it takes more than free content to make a mod "fre" - think about the unit scripts. A lot of mod units use all new parts, but the scripts are copies of the TA units with the numbers and names changed. I know Xect and Mynn were designed specifically avoiding that becuse they were made for retail purposes, which is part of why they were so hard to get into Spring.PauloMorfeo wrote:I'm sorry if this has been mentioned but i haven't been having the time to cover all posts.
Is it planned to make the mod not use copyrighted content? Like the old TA sounds. So it can, eventually, comply with the rules needed to be shiped with Linux distributions as well as beeing on the safe side of legality as far as distributing Spring goes.
You really shouldn't assume such things about people. After all, you have no way of knowing whether I'm a highschool kid or a computer engineering graduate and a software developer.smoth wrote:that is a really stupid arguement.
If you knew more about programing you would know that there are sometimes only a handfull of ways to do things. Scripting is like that.
this isn't something that requires a real programer.
(Yeah, it's the software one)
And it doens't matter if your code comes out looking just like their code - what matters is the process. If you copied/pasted their script to make yours and then tweaked the numbers (which is often the case - how many l3 mechs are just redesigned Krogs?) then that's using Cavedog IP.
I assumed nothing, I would make the same statement to any programmer.Pxtl wrote: You really shouldn't assume such things about people. After all, you have no way of knowing whether I'm a highschool kid or a computer engineering graduate and a software developer.
(Yeah, it's the software one)
And it doens't matter if your code comes out looking just like their code - what matters is the process. If you copied/pasted their script to make yours and then tweaked the numbers (which is often the case - how many l3 mechs are just redesigned Krogs?) then that's using Cavedog IP.
The process? Like, perhaps the TA code that is needed for factories to build.. I have no idea why it HAS to be there but it does and I have simplified it where I can. Like oh say.. the script "flaming ass" that I have given to many scripters... or the script bits I gave to fang throughout his process.
For example a bubble sort or improved bubble sort can only be written a few ways. I would DIE LAUGHING at a programmer who says "you stole my bubble sort!" Also some naming conventions will stay making the code look exceptionally similar. or code comments that are left because you base something off of other code then you delete the code you were looking at...leaving the statement. I have statements like this in my code.
At the end of the day, a programmer getting pissed about scripting is like someone getting pissed about html. the programmer is retarded.
Courts of law tend to take these things more seriously. And Pxtl is indeed right. Copying and pasting from code owned by someone else is a bad move, legally. This is why things like Clean Room Design exist.smoth wrote:For example a bubble sort or improved bubble sort can only be written a few ways. I would DIE LAUGHING at a programmer who says "you stole my bubble sort!"
Is someone likely to sue over some scripts used in a downloadable mod? Probably not. But they will keep it out of most Linux distributions, as they tend have a very strict approach to IP law and avoid anything that's even remotely questionable.
Nothing to do with smart or stupid. This is about legality. If your code is a block of copied/pasted code that is copyrighted and then you changed part of it to make it do what you want, then that is a derivative work. I know it's a stupid attitude - but unless you can get a lawyer to say otherwise, I'd avoid stating unilaterally that you don't have to worry about the script when making a "free" mod, as otherwise whoever owns the rights to TA can come back and sue your ass.smoth wrote:
I assumed nothing, I would make the same statement to any programmer.
The process? Like, perhaps the TA code that is needed for factories to build.. I have no idea why it HAS to be there but it does and I have simplified it where I can. Like oh say.. the script "flaming ass" that I have given to many scripters... or the script bits I gave to fang throughout his process.
For example a bubble sort or improved bubble sort can only be written a few ways. I would DIE LAUGHING at a programmer who says "you stole my bubble sort!" Also some naming conventions will stay making the code look exceptionally similar. or code comments that are left because you base something off of other code then you delete the code you were looking at...leaving the statement. I have statements like this in my code.
At the end of the day, a programmer getting pissed about scripting is like someone getting pissed about html. the programmer is retarded.
Imagine the scenario:
Distro X ships with Spring, using a "free" mod. Ditro X gains momentum, gets mainstream popularity, starts getting sold in stores like Redhat once did. Spring likewise gains popularity. Now, imagine that Game Company Legal Dept notices that a TA clone is in this distro. They try and find out if any original content is there, since the game is an obvious clone... and find nothing except the scripts.
But the scripts are enough, and so Distro X suddenly has a massive, painful legal liability.
geez this needs to be in a WEEKLY topic rotation.
it is all in what area of code looks the most similar. I have seen 2 or 3 instances that students any my uni came up with near identical programs because the work was so generic.
It seems to me that scripting is similar. I can understand the linux distro thing. On that note spring will never be distributable until they remove things like the loading functions, the factory handlers and the particle system controls.
it is all in what area of code looks the most similar. I have seen 2 or 3 instances that students any my uni came up with near identical programs because the work was so generic.
It seems to me that scripting is similar. I can understand the linux distro thing. On that note spring will never be distributable until they remove things like the loading functions, the factory handlers and the particle system controls.
Actually, what's really important is documentation of process and intent. If the people suing you can prove that you copied and pasted from code they own, you're screwed. If you can prove that you employed, say, Clean Room methods to rewrite similar functionality from scratch, even if the code winds up looking identical, you're set.smoth wrote:it is all in what area of code looks the most similar.
Yes, that's a pretty good description of IP law.smoth wrote:hmm, that is intesting... kinda like chasing ghosts.
It's stupid, but it's something that software projects have to deal with these days.The best thing to do would probably be to move the scripting language away from the way TA does things, to make it more reasonable and make the scripts copyright-safe. Having to reference existing scripts to create a working factory sounds unpleasant. But that's very time-consuming.
There's many lines in Cavedog scripts that makes no sense, or that could be greatly optimised, or that are completly arbitrary, and they all get copied as they are in many a 3rd party unit. Some exemple are the if(TRUE) bewteen each block in walkscript, the messy stuff they do around activation, all the function names that are called by other function and not by the engine, all function a bit complex like transport's arm that people copy'n'paste without understanding, the whole MotionControl() function, the tradionnal variable names, .....
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
If you wanna be real picky...
If you want completely no strings attached free content, you are on the wrong engine. Cause basically spring is a rewrite of ota code in full 3d. Now if the spring dev team had thought long term, then they would have made is totally independent of TA, but as it is, it is very much dependant on TA.
If you want completely no strings attached free content, you are on the wrong engine. Cause basically spring is a rewrite of ota code in full 3d. Now if the spring dev team had thought long term, then they would have made is totally independent of TA, but as it is, it is very much dependant on TA.
I still we can still get away with the excuse "Spring units scripts, and units in general, are made to be compatible with TA". Or maybe "the engine is made to be compatible with TA units", or something like that. As far as I know it's allowed to make your product compatible with the files of the concurrence. And from that it's obvious we have to use the same script function name for the script function called by the engine, the same script commands, etc...
But still lots of things must be cleaned from most of the 3rd party scripts that are copied directly from Cavedog units.
But still lots of things must be cleaned from most of the 3rd party scripts that are copied directly from Cavedog units.
That's not a problem, though. AFAIK, the Spring devs had no access to the TA code during development. I think that'd only cause problems if there was a patent on some of the related algorithms.Forboding Angel wrote:If you want completely no strings attached free content, you are on the wrong engine. Cause basically spring is a rewrite of ota code in full 3d. Now if the spring dev team had thought long term, then they would have made is totally independent of TA, but as it is, it is very much dependant on TA.
Yes, so the engine is free. The problem is that nearly every script in every mod is a modified copy/paste of a TA script, or a descent thereof. The only one I'm not sure about is Xect Vs. Mynn, which was made specifically to be Cavedogless (since the developer originally sold the Mynn as a retail product).Egarwaen wrote:That's not a problem, though. AFAIK, the Spring devs had no access to the TA code during development. I think that'd only cause problems if there was a patent on some of the related algorithms.Forboding Angel wrote:If you want completely no strings attached free content, you are on the wrong engine. Cause basically spring is a rewrite of ota code in full 3d. Now if the spring dev team had thought long term, then they would have made is totally independent of TA, but as it is, it is very much dependant on TA.