Licensing problem: ET-SDK vs. GPLv3


(morsik) #1

Hi.

I’m trying to write my own mod for ET, but it’s based on ETXreaL’s etmain (which is based on Enemy Territory Source Code (GPLv3)).
I would like to implement some things which are currently in etpub but it’s under ET-SDK.
I’m quite confused now about that, because as we know, ET was released under GPLv3 so, does ET-SDK was voided so i can use etpub’s source code? Or ET-SDK exists only for old projects which use this license originally? Or it was ‘magically’ changed (probably without knowledge of modders - but i don’t think that’s possible from law point) to GPLv3?

Thanks in advance


(SBKch) #2

No, et-sdk was just double-licensed when it was released as part of enemy territory sources under GPL license. Projects that use code from et-sdk can release their code on GPL license now, but don’t have to do so. If there was no Contributor License Agreement for contributors of that projects (mods), usually every contributor has to consent to relicense it. If you want to use only code of specific contributor you can obtain right to it from that contributor, as he is the copiright owner for the code he provided (again if there was no CLA).

BTW. I would really like to see etxreal license changed to AGPL instead of GPL (it is possible, because v3 of GPL&AGPL are compatible, that wasn’t acceptable for GPLv2). It would force modders/forkers that make changes only for their own servers to release source code needed to build server for their modifications based on it (GPL requires sharing of source code with direct users of program only).


(Eonfge) #3

affero general public license

Preamble

The GNU Affero General Public License is a free, copyleft license for software and other kinds of works, specifically designed to ensure cooperation with the community in the case of network server software.

The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast, our General Public Licenses are intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change all versions of a program–to make sure it remains free software for all its users.

When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs, and that you know you can do these things.

Developers that use our General Public Licenses protect your rights with two steps: (1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software.

A secondary benefit of defending all users’ freedom is that improvements made in alternate versions of the program, if they receive widespread use, become available for other developers to incorporate. Many developers of free software are heartened and encouraged by the resulting cooperation. However, in the case of software used on network servers, this result may fail to come about. The GNU General Public License permits making a modified version and letting the public access it on a server without ever releasing its source code to the public.

The GNU Affero General Public License is designed specifically to ensure that, in such cases, the modified source code becomes available to the community. It requires the operator of a network server to provide the source code of the modified version running there to the users of that server. Therefore, public use of a modified version, on a publicly accessible server, gives the public access to the source code of the modified version.

An older license, called the Affero General Public License and published by Affero, was designed to accomplish similar goals. This is a different license, not a version of the Affero GPL, but Affero has released a new version of the Affero GPL which permits relicensing under this license.

The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and modification follow.

I see what you intent to do. I know the license and I understand that using AGPL makes us more powerful to force server admins to share the mod code. This applies to the code they host on their own server, which they have written them self.

Point is, that I think that’s to much power. Although I support strong Copy Left as a form of self protection, I also consider it someone’s right to make changes and use them him self, without having to tell everyone.

Also, most of the risks are already covered by the existing GPL. A mod maker is not allowed to share and distribute the mod without sharing the code. This gives the project enough legal power to prevent and limit the locked-in situation in which we are now.

It’s also worth knowing that the asset license is CC-BY-SA.


(SBKch) #4

right to make changes and use them him self, without having to tell everyone

No, that’s not exactly my or AGPL point :slight_smile:
AGPL lets everyone to make modifications for their own use and don’t publish anything, they just can’t use that modified sources to provide services to others if they don’t make sources available for them.
Theoretical situation: someone makes modification (or just “mod”) for his/someone else public server, for which he provides only client source code (to build ui, cgame) and not his PUBLIC server code (qagame, but etded too). So that way he legally makes closed fork of etxreal (because client code alone isn’t enough for other server admins to set their own similar et servers, or fork and make own modifications).