[Nel] Re: NeL's GPL status

[Damon Trask]

> On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 03:33:20PM -0700, Damon Trask wrote:
> > A friend of mine said that GPL is interpreted that if you link, call or 
> use
> > GPL'd code in any fashion in a piece of software intended for public
> > distribution, that you must include *all* the source code of the 
> intended
> > software, even if the GPL parts are very small/minor.
> > Is this true?

<snip>

> Essentially, if the code is in the same executable, or even a shared
> library (they call into each other etc), it all has to be GPL.  The only
> real way to keep them seperate is by chaining together seperate
> executables with some high level IPC apparently.  Or you can (for
> example), have your login/patch interface be a seperate program then
> your actual game client.  Although I'm sure making revolutionary
> proprietary developments in game launcher technology isn't exactly your
> main focus.
>
> They go on to say that this type of behavior is intended, as mixing GPL
> and non-GPL causes all sorts of ambiguity with the users and such as they
> determine what they can and can't modify etc.  GPL is one of the more
> heavy handed licenses (BSD and Artistic are known to be a bit more
> friendly to third parties), and intentionally so.
>
> Technically, the developer can make an exception and dual license the
> code.  Which lets them release closed modifications for their own
> purposes etc.  So, you may be able to get Nevrax to grant you an
> exception, although you would of course have to work that out on your
> own. ;)  However, I am not sure of the legal issues of other people
> contributing code to NeL with the understanding that it was GPL.  As
> there may be code copyrighted to third parties commited to the NeL
> codebase as GPL, which would mean they would need to authorize any
> license split as well.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReleaseUnderGPLAndNF
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#Consider

So in essence if I wanted to make a game using NeL, I can expect that I'm 
likely going to need to release the source to any software which is 
distributed, namely the client-side software?

> > Also, if this *is* true, how would it be possible to design a commercial
> > Persistant State World game client under GPL (meaning the source becomes
> > public), and still maintain system/service security.
> > If the source to the client becomes public, is it still possible to keep
> > people from hacking, cheating, or any number of malicious activities
> > against your product/service?
> >
> > Any help here would be appreciated...

<snip>

> I'm not really sure of any other security issues outside of the cheating
> that is already possible with existing games (anywhere from Diablo2
> closed realm dupe hacks, to Everquest speed hacks, to UO player run 
> shards...)
> that open source would exascerbate.  There's also the legal route, where
> you can require users to play nice or you cancel their account at best,
> and take legal action at worst.
>
> Hope that helped a bit. ;)

It does a bit. If I used NeL for a commercial game I'd have to release the 
source, but that wouldn't automaticly mean that said game would be easy to 
hack/cheat/etc?
Is that about the sum of things?

Thanks.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE 
download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/