Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44

Thread: Nexuiz re-make on the 360

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    671

    Default

    I didnt understand a single thing that above post says. I think they are using these "copyright" assignment and transfer talk and not mentioning that they cannot use GPL code and just cheerfully close it and turn it propietary. It really saddens me to see people like Paul ‘Echon’ Jackson, the guy who made the quake engine port EGL, Forest ‘LordHavoc’ Hale, Dark Places guy, and Chris Holden, on board with this dubious Illfonic people.

    Illfonic is already pulling their strings they have with Lord Havoc to close threads about this on Alien Trap's own forum as shown here: www.alientrap.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=6043. And art assets too, I dont think they got the all clear from every contributor of every art asset made for nexuiz that they are going to include in this console release.

    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?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,129

    Default Some perspective

    Wait a moment, why is this development sad? What's so bad about the developers deciding to make some money after working their asses out for free, year after year? It's not as if the new port will render us unable to able to play the game we all know and love!

    What we have here is a new game, with different art assets and similar mechanics, targeting a different, completely proprietary platform. Why do current players feel they are somehow affected by this is beyond me. (Or have you actually forked your money to Microsoft for an Xbox? Sorry, but you don't get to gripe about the non-GPL license then).

    Best of luck to them, I say.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Wait a moment, why is this development sad? What's so bad about the developers deciding to make some money after working their asses out for free...
    Well the development isn't sad if they're not using community contributed code and assets.

    I certainly wouldn't want to have code that I contributed to the project become the property of someone else without my say so. I don't know if this is happening, but if anything like it was to then I'm sure there'll be a bit of a backlash to say the least.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Have a good day.
    Posts
    678

    Default

    But that is not what happened. What in principle should be good news is, for some reason, perceived as an insult to 'the community'. The guy from Illfonic sounded perfectly reasonable and wasted his time trying to explain what the situation was. In return he got more of the same whining, insults and threats to give bad publicity to his project. And what is 'the community' bitching about? Well, they don't sound very coherent, apparently they demand Illfonic to adopt a different name (even suggesting that it should be 'the community' to decide it) and to have an equal clicking area in Illfonic's web site...Yeah, we're getting pretty serious now. Oh, and they want stuff back (from where, one would ask?). Engine improvements are not enough, apparently, they'd like art assests too (so they can mix and match ala OpenArena I presume?).

    Whatever, I hope the game does well.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,129

    Default

    I certainly wouldn't want to have code that I contributed to the project become the property of someone else without my say so. I don't know if this is happening, but if anything like it was to then I'm sure there'll be a bit of a backlash to say the least.
    As someone who has had his MIT/X11-licensed code integrated into a proprietary, closed-source offering (by a major Linux player, no less), all I can say is... this isn't always bad. The increased project visibility and/or code contributions may be worth it (keyword: may).

    Then again, GPL explicitly prevents this "attack vector", by not allowing relicensing under closed-source terms. Which means one of four things may have happened here: (a) the core Nexuiz devs required all contributors to assign copyright to the Nexuiz team (which means they can relicense as they please)
    (b) they hunted down all contributors and got their written approval for the license change
    (c) they simply removed all GPL code not contributed by themselves
    (d) they XBox port will actually remain GPLed (but the new assets won't).

    Now, they interesting thing is how they will gain access to the XBox devkit. The freely available tools are C#/XNA-only, which means they are not suitable for the job. Or will they port the game to an XBox-capable engine (like the upcoming version of Unity3d)?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Quote 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.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Germany/NRW
    Posts
    510

    Default

    Quote 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.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Merida
    Posts
    1,099

    Default

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

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    671

    Default

    Quote 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.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Merida
    Posts
    1,099

    Default

    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •