aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/pipermail/nel/2001-February/000226.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorneodarz <neodarz@neodarz.net>2018-08-11 20:21:34 +0200
committerneodarz <neodarz@neodarz.net>2018-08-11 20:21:34 +0200
commit0ea5fc66924303d1bf73ba283a383e2aadee02f2 (patch)
tree2568e71a7ccc44ec23b8bb3f0ff97fb6bf2ed709 /pipermail/nel/2001-February/000226.html
downloadnevrax-website-self-hostable-0ea5fc66924303d1bf73ba283a383e2aadee02f2.tar.xz
nevrax-website-self-hostable-0ea5fc66924303d1bf73ba283a383e2aadee02f2.zip
Initial commit
Diffstat (limited to '')
-rw-r--r--pipermail/nel/2001-February/000226.html166
1 files changed, 166 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/pipermail/nel/2001-February/000226.html b/pipermail/nel/2001-February/000226.html
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..7cfbe342
--- /dev/null
+++ b/pipermail/nel/2001-February/000226.html
@@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
+<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
+<HTML>
+ <HEAD>
+ <TITLE> [Nel] Something I don't understand about the license agreement.</TITLE>
+ <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
+ <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:svferro%40earthlink.com">
+ <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="000227.html">
+ <LINK REL="Next" HREF="000235.html">
+ </HEAD>
+ <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
+ <H1>[Nel] Something I don't understand about the license agreement.</H1>
+ <B>Sal</B>
+ <A HREF="mailto:svferro%40earthlink.com"
+ TITLE="[Nel] Something I don't understand about the license agreement.">svferro@earthlink.com</A><BR>
+ <I>Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:50:42 -0500</I>
+ <P><UL>
+ <LI> Previous message: <A HREF="000227.html">[Nel] Something I don't understand about the license agreement.</A></li>
+ <LI> Next message: <A HREF="000235.html">[Nel] Something I don't understand about the license agreement.</A></li>
+ <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
+ <a href="date.html#226">[ date ]</a>
+ <a href="thread.html#226">[ thread ]</a>
+ <a href="subject.html#226">[ subject ]</a>
+ <a href="author.html#226">[ author ]</a>
+ </LI>
+ </UL>
+ <HR>
+<!--beginarticle-->
+<PRE>&gt;<i> I just want to make sure I understand this right...
+</I>&gt;<i> I use this source code to build the base of my game...
+</I>&gt;<i> I do all sorts of work to make my own game built around this core
+</I>engine...
+&gt;<i> I then try to get people to play the game...
+</I>&gt;<i> People get the game (for free, or at least, for the cost of shipping it,
+</I>but no profit can be made on
+&gt;<i> that...)
+</I>
+ The last point isn't necessarily true. You could likely sell your game
+for as much as you want. As Red Hat sells Linux. The GPL only insures that
+the source code to the binaries in your distribution must be made available.
+It doesn't cover the media you make, the documentation you write. People
+don't have the right to redistribute your custom media, or your custom game
+manuals. Downloading the binary still won't grant you ability to play the
+game... you need the media. Which is where the advantage is in the GPL game
+market in comparison to something like an operating system, such as Linux.
+
+ In short, you can still make money off of a GPL game. Though I would
+rather see companies release all their artwork under an opencontent license,
+they don't have to.
+
+&gt;<i> I charge for the monthly service to the game, and make boat loads of
+</I>money...
+
+&gt;<i> But then, because of the way this license reads, someone else can request
+</I>the entire source code to
+&gt;<i> my game, set up their own game that's exactly like mine, and charge people
+</I>to use it just like I am
+&gt;<i> doing...
+</I>
+ If I'm not mistaken, the things that define your game would mostly be
+located in serverside databases. Yes any modification to the server _code_
+would have to be redistributed, but you could create pretty unique worlds
+and plots by simply editing some serverside database. Which entails
+creating maps, placing NPCs, possibly even defining rules such as what
+skills players have.
+
+ I'm pretty sure these databases would not be covered by the GPL. All
+that people could 'steal' would be your binaries. And that does not mean
+they can carbon-coby your game. Your rules, mapfiles, plot, etc. could all
+be copywritten material.
+
+ And if you were able to modify the Nel code to make a better game...
+then someone that uses your code could likely make a better game yet. And
+the code that they created, you could use yet again in your own server.
+Opensource has many advantages related to software quality. Imagine how many
+people would be working to fix bugs and improve the codebase that is
+powering your world, in comparison to a proprietary codebase.
+
+&gt;<i> So if all of the above is correct... what is the point of me making my
+</I>game using
+&gt;<i> NeL in the first place? When someone can just steal my entire game (not
+</I>just
+&gt;<i> the NeL source, but all of the &quot;derivitive works&quot; that are packaged with
+</I>it as a
+&gt;<i> whole), and run the game service themselves... basically, taking me out of
+</I>the loop
+&gt;<i> entirely.
+</I>
+ I think 'derivitive works' pertains to modifications of the Nel codebase
+(not artwork, media. documentation, rules, etc.). And I think its fair that
+you would be required to release your source changes, since its the hard
+work of others that makes your game possible, and they just want to make
+sure that your code improvements to their product will be made available.
+
+ Again, your game could have plenty of copywritten material that would
+not be easily 'stolen', and in fact, would be the equivalent of stealing the
+ruleset and media from an proprietary game, such as Asheron's Call or
+Everquest. Which is prosecutable.
+
+ Say I downloaded the binaries for Everquest's client and server (imagine
+they were GPLed). I still could not create an 'Everquest' game and put them
+out of business, I would need to create an exact copy of all their media, I
+would also have to mimic their ruleset, copy their maps, etc. And doing all
+that would be illegal, since its all copywritten material.
+
+ I also could not sell CD's of Everquest, because in order for their
+client to be useful it needs all the copywritten material that comes on the
+Everquest CD.
+
+&gt;<i> If I'm completely off here, I appologise. I'm extremely new to the whole
+</I>&quot;open source&quot;
+&gt;<i> thing...
+</I>
+&gt;<i> My main concern is that I have a bunch of gameplay concepts that I want to
+</I>implement...
+&gt;<i> having nothing to do with graphical quality, or any sort of innovative
+</I>programming...
+&gt;<i> I have plot, and I have what I consider a &quot;bigger and better plan&quot; than
+</I>anything UO or
+&gt;<i> EQ or AC have ever done... and this license is basically saying that I
+</I>have to give all of
+&gt;<i> THAT stuff up if I choose to use NeL as my core code?
+</I>
+ Where you're mistaken is that the GPL doesnt force you to distribute
+_everything_ for free. Just the material that is covered under the GPL,
+which would be, the source code to the binaries... and the source to any
+libraries used in conjunction with them.
+
+ I'm not a lawyer, by any means. But I have some experience in developing
+opensource gaming software. I think a lot of people share the same
+misconceptions, which is why I felt compelled to reply. I'm of the opinion
+that opensource and games are a perfect match. Its really a no-lose
+situation, if you're thinking of developing your own game.
+
+- Sal
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<!--endarticle-->
+ <HR>
+ <P><UL>
+ <!--threads-->
+ <LI> Previous message: <A HREF="000227.html">[Nel] Something I don't understand about the license agreement.</A></li>
+ <LI> Next message: <A HREF="000235.html">[Nel] Something I don't understand about the license agreement.</A></li>
+ <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
+ <a href="date.html#226">[ date ]</a>
+ <a href="thread.html#226">[ thread ]</a>
+ <a href="subject.html#226">[ subject ]</a>
+ <a href="author.html#226">[ author ]</a>
+ </LI>
+ </UL>
+</body></html>