Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nexuiz re-make on the 360

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
    Then again, GPL explicitly prevents this "attack vector", by not allowing relicensing under closed-source terms.
    As long as they're playing by the rules no one should have any issue with what they're doing. Not everyone plays nice though, lets hope they are. Unless there's evidence of foul play though I hope people attacking them is kept to a minimum.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by xav1r View Post
      They mention too that they got a "DarkPlaces license". Can Lord Havoc do that at all? Isnt DarkPlaces a derived port of the GPL'ed quake 1 engine?
      It's actually quite simple: They licensed the DarkPlaces-Engine from LordHavoc and the Quake1-Engine (or was it 2?) from iD. LordHavoc required people who contributed code to the DarkPlaces-Engine to assign the copyright to him, so that deal is perfectly legal.
      Illfonic also bought the rights to the trademark "Nexuiz" from Vermeulen, the original creator of Nexuiz, who afaik stopped contributing a few years ago. So it's kind of morally questionable for him to sell the trademark imho, but again perfectly legal.
      Apart from the engine afaik the only parts used from the original Nexuiz will be a few maps, for which they supposedly also got a permission from the respective authors.
      So there's really no GPL-violation or anything else illegal going on. Illfonic are not that stupid. :P But what Illfonic should've done is to involve/inform the community earlier, and not do it behind its back. Then there surely wouldn't have been such a huge back-leash at them.

      Comment


      • #18
        So they did buy it. I was under the impression that the domain and name were simply "given away".

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Zhick View Post
          It's actually quite simple: They licensed the DarkPlaces-Engine from LordHavoc and the Quake1-Engine (or was it 2?) from iD. LordHavoc required people who contributed code to the DarkPlaces-Engine to assign the copyright to him, so that deal is perfectly legal.
          Illfonic also bought the rights to the trademark "Nexuiz" from Vermeulen, the original creator of Nexuiz, who afaik stopped contributing a few years ago. So it's kind of morally questionable for him to sell the trademark imho, but again perfectly legal.
          Apart from the engine afaik the only parts used from the original Nexuiz will be a few maps, for which they supposedly also got a permission from the respective authors.
          So there's really no GPL-violation or anything else illegal going on. Illfonic are not that stupid. :P But what Illfonic should've done is to involve/inform the community earlier, and not do it behind its back. Then there surely wouldn't have been such a huge back-leash at them.
          AFAIK, id doesnt make give licenses to the quake 1 engine anymore. The only way to use it now is under the GPL. I dont get why they can use GPL'ed code, which some of what they have right now falls under, and just close it.

          Comment


          • #20
            The more I read about the subject, the more I start to feel that it was a dick move by AT. Perfectly legal and nothing of what they did seems overly shady, but just messed up when it comes to the moral aspect concerning the community.
            The "game" is still there. Hopefully the community does not loose interest or kills off the project as a form of "revenge", because I really like the game and it will be a shame to loose it.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Melcar View Post
              The more I read about the subject, the more I start to feel that it was a dick move by AT. Perfectly legal and nothing of what they did seems overly shady, but just messed up when it comes to the moral aspect concerning the community.
              Wait a moment, what is the moral aspect concerning the community? Why does the community feel that the an open-source developer owes them something? Not only has he/she given how many years of his life away for free, now the community demands for more?

              Something doesn't fit here, at least the way I see it.

              Comment


              • #22
                Well, the "community" has been largely responsible for the project in recent years, and my understanding is that the top guys at AT haven't been that active with the project in comparison. The main beef everyone is having is that the decision wasn't made clear sooner and there was no real transparency. I'm sure if AT came out a while back with an announcement detailing their future plan the community as a whole wouldn't be as upset.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                  Wait a moment, what is the moral aspect concerning the community? Why does the community feel that the an open-source developer owes them something? Not only has he/she given how many years of his life away for free, now the community demands for more?

                  Something doesn't fit here, at least the way I see it.
                  Community, in this case, includes pretty much all developers (programmers, mappers) except for the original one, who afaik has not contributed for years.
                  So morally I'd agree that the developer-community should have a say in what happens with Nexuiz, since they helped making it what it is now.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Zhick View Post
                    Community, in this case, includes pretty much all developers (programmers, mappers) except for the original one, who afaik has not contributed for years.
                    So morally I'd agree that the developer-community should have a say in what happens with Nexuiz, since they helped making it what it is now.
                    Don't they still have access to the code and the assets? What's stopping them from having a say?

                    Edit: I guess I don't see how this affects the community.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      The original code and assets are still there. There is no "actual" problem in that the community can still pick up the game and keep working on it. The issue is more philosophical and sentimental at this point. The community as a whole feels betrayed from what AT did by not being more open about this whole thing. The issue is not technical or even legal, so yeah, you can pretty much tell the community to suck it up and deal with it. The brand "Nexuiz" is pretty much gone though; some people get attached to those things and it's not surprising when they get upset at things like what's happening.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I'm still going to have to question its legality..... I dont see how game code that was written outside of darkplaces could be made closed. I can see how darkplaces could do it, but it seems to me ALOT of game code is still being closed that is -NOT- part of it.

                        As far as I can tell there is in fact code that is being used that does qualify as a GPL violation. Of course Illfonics claims that all of the code they have has been legally re-licensed, but they've only been working on it for a few months now. I dont think there is any chance in hell that they could have a working demo right now without using GPLed code. ------ Heres the problem of course Illfonics will --NEVER-- show there code, and so we'll never know for certain if they did use GPL code or not.------

                        And then there is the moral issues involved. We -ALL- know what is right and wrong, and good and bad.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          As far as I can tell there is in fact code that is being used that does qualify as a GPL violation.
                          Meh. If a copyright holder is feeling that his license has been violated, he can contact the FSF for investigation.

                          I dont think there is any chance in hell that they could have a working demo right now without using GPLed code.
                          I can't see how the human eye could have evolved from proteins, so there must be a god. Double meh.

                          Not understanding something doesn't mean it's not possible.

                          And then there is the moral issues involved. We -ALL- know what is right and wrong, and good and bad.
                          Of course. Wrong and bad is whatever an individual doesn't personally like. Right, good and moral is everything he does. Triple meh.

                          Or do you really think that source code has its own morality? Closed-source bad, open-source good?

                          As far as I can tell, this guy saw a business opportunity and is pursuing it. As long as he makes sure his effort is legal, I don't see anything wrong with this. If it's not... well, it's going to bite him in the ass (and he seems to be fully aware of that).

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                            Meh. If a copyright holder is feeling that his license has been violated, he can contact the FSF for investigation.

                            I can't see how the human eye could have evolved from proteins, so there must be a god. Double meh.

                            Not understanding something doesn't mean it's not possible.

                            Of course. Wrong and bad is whatever an individual doesn't personally like. Right, good and moral is everything he does. Triple meh.

                            Or do you really think that source code has its own morality? Closed-source bad, open-source good?

                            As far as I can tell, this guy saw a business opportunity and is pursuing it. As long as he makes sure his effort is legal, I don't see anything wrong with this. If it's not... well, it's going to bite him in the ass (and he seems to be fully aware of that).
                            Your personal beliefs aside, Your right that not understanding something doesnt mean that it isnt possible. However I am a firm believer in probabilities.The number of lines of code, the number of people working on this, and most importantly, the amount of time that has expired just dont add up. Not impossible, but definitely improbable.

                            So once again we are stuck with the same problem. The only proof is if he shows the code and that isnt going to happen. And that is whats wrong with it. The only thing we have to go by is HIS word and the people HE paid off. I'm sorry, but I just dont trust it. I think this is just another example from thousands of others where open source code is being used illegally in a closed project without any burden of proof on the jackasses that are stealing this code except of course for their "word"

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                              I'm still going to have to question its legality..... I dont see how game code that was written outside of darkplaces could be made closed. I can see how darkplaces could do it, but it seems to me ALOT of game code is still being closed that is -NOT- part of it.

                              As far as I can tell there is in fact code that is being used that does qualify as a GPL violation. Of course Illfonics claims that all of the code they have has been legally re-licensed, but they've only been working on it for a few months now. I dont think there is any chance in hell that they could have a working demo right now without using GPLed code. ------ Heres the problem of course Illfonics will --NEVER-- show there code, and so we'll never know for certain if they did use GPL code or not.------

                              And then there is the moral issues involved. We -ALL- know what is right and wrong, and good and bad.

                              Exactly. The quake 1 engine, which is what DarkPlaces is based on, is GPL 2.0 code. id software does not provide commercial license agreements with the quake 1 engine anymore. You have to use the GPL codebase. DarkPlaces is based on GPL code, therefore is it GPL, and bits of it cannot be happily integrated into a closed engine and become propietary. Yes, the GPL is viral. That's why the big commercial industry hates it so much. Im thinking, yes, the software freedom center should know about this. This is Tivo all over again.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I want to clarify that yes, relicensing of my engine is exactly what happened, and id Software may not promote the Quake1 engine license offer anymore but contacting their parent company Zenimax has the desired results, it is my belief that all the companies involved are happy with this deal.

                                The name and concept are licensed from Alientrap, not transferred.

                                The game was demoed at GDC on 8 Sony Playstation 3 development consoles.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X