1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Nel] Gamer question</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:psiegel%40geneticanomalies.com">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="000813.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="000815.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Nel] Gamer question</H1>
<B>Paul Siegel</B>
<A HREF="mailto:psiegel%40geneticanomalies.com"
TITLE="[Nel] Gamer question">psiegel@geneticanomalies.com</A><BR>
<I>Fri, 14 Dec 2001 08:52:43 -0500</I>
<P><UL>
<LI> Previous message: <A HREF="000813.html">[Nel] Landscapes without 3DSMax</A></li>
<LI> Next message: <A HREF="000815.html">[Nel] RE: GPL confusion</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#814">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#814">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#814">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#814">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>Kai, from my reading of the GPL, everything wraps around the clause of "if
you distribute". Since Ryzom has yet to be distributed, I don't think
Nevrax is under any obligation to share the source code.
Under this same logic, I would think that Nevrax will never have to release
the source code of their servers, since such software is really for internal
use only, not to be distributed. Isn't that correct?
Paul
><i> I don't want to drag this out eternally, but I see a little lapse of
</I>><i> reasoning. Technically speaking, the development version of Ryzom is
</I>><i> probably currently being linked and tested with NeL, therefore, Ryzom
</I>><i> must inherit the GPL.
</I>><i> Therefore, the current development code is in the public domain, therefore
</I>><i> should be published. Of course, I understand your need to keep Ryzom
</I>><i> "secret" until it is done, releasable and sellable, so that you can put
</I>food
><i> on your plates (and buy big cars for your Venture Capital people), yet,
</I>isn't
><i> this secrecy a violation of the GPL, since Ryzom is GPL'd?
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Wouldn't it be better then, for Nevrax, if NeL was LGPL, and thereby
</I>making
><i> it legal (or rather, in accordance to the GPL) for you to keep Ryzom from
</I>><i> public eyes?
</I>
</pre>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI> Previous message: <A HREF="000813.html">[Nel] Landscapes without 3DSMax</A></li>
<LI> Next message: <A HREF="000815.html">[Nel] RE: GPL confusion</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#814">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#814">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#814">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#814">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
</body></html>
|
