Zugg Software :: View topic

Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:43 pm

Rorso, I can see where you are coming from. But I think you are putting too much into that GPL thinking. While you can certainly have your own interpretation of the license, that is certainly *not* how licenses are legally enforced. There haven't been very many legal cases like this yet, but so far the cases I have seen actually resolved are pretty reasonable. Yes, you can get paranoid about this. Consider the following case:

I have a book on algorithms that shows how to do a Quicksort routine in Delphi. So I use that in my code. The license on the CD from the book says that the code from the book can be used freely for any purpose. OK, but where did the author learn about Quicksort? Did he read the Knuth Computing series of books and take the core algorithm from there? Did he learn it in school from a teacher or from another text book? Did he learn about it on the Internet from some web site? Who knows. Does that mean I can't use his algorithm in my commercial project? Absolutely not.

Just because one person says something is GPL doesn't mean that everything related to it is automatically GPL in a legal sense. For example, I can even take what Nexela said about phpBB. What if I have a corporate database and create my own phpBB module to display information from that database on my corporate web site. Does that mean I have to release the source code to my corporate database as GPL? Of course not. That is still protected as proprietary information, as is the plugin that I wrote.

Just because the phpBB license *says* that any module created for it has to be GPL doesn't make it legally binding. If people started trying to enforce some of the silly licensing they are trying to do, they would quickly find themselves in a much more complex situation. It is not nearly as clear cut as the GPL proponents want to wish that it is.

The closest thing to all of this that has longer history to draw precedent from is books. If you write a romance novel, does that violate the copyright of another romance novel? Of course not. It has to be more specific than that. What if you read a romance novel in the past and forgot about it and then wrote a new book with the same plot? Is that a violation? Maybe. If the original author can show that your plot and characters is the same as a previous work to a great extent, then he might have a case. But it has to be really specific. As an example, there is a sci-fi book series by Jack Chalker that uses the concept that we are living in a computer simulated world. The first book reads a lot like the Matrix movies. But Chalkers book was written well before Matrix. Did the makers of Matrix "steal" the idea from Chalker? Some people like to argue this, but in the *legal* sense, they did not. The characters were different, the plot was different, even though the "concept" was similar.

When you deal with actual legal cases, "intent" is often very important. If someone used a copyrighted work in their own work without aquiring permission, then it's a copyright violation. But if you accidentally create the same source code as someone else, as long as you can show your original notes and work, then you are fine and it is *not* a copyright violation. That is why documentation of research project is so important, so that you can show that your own work is original.

In your case, if you wrote the zscript code yourself and did not use a 3rd party parser component, then you are fine. You said you "did it from memory". That's what matters. You didn't copy someone elses code. You didn't use someones copyrighted parser. You wrote it yourself. That makes it yours and you can do what you want with it.

So, you can say "you can use this code for whatever you want, but it's not supported". That means that you don't need to respond to suggestions or bug fixes. You have released the code "as is" for any purpose. But that's a bit open-ended. For example, that would allow me to take the code and sell it myself. So, you might say "you can use this code for whatever you want, but you should give me credit for the work, and it's not supported". With that condition, I would have to give you credit in whatever project I used it. You could also specifically release it with only the condition that it be used on the zuggsoft.com forum site and for no other purpose. You can make the license conditions as open or as closed as you want.

But don't get too paranoid about this. Yeah, I've seen a bunch of situations where people "accuse" someone else of stealing code. The MUD community is full of this kind of stuff. In some cases it's pretty obvious because if you look at the source code, you have routines with *exactly* the same variable names, bugs, etc. That's a clear case of copyright violation. But there are other cases where people are accused falsely with no evidence to back it up. Just because something looks similar doesn't mean it's a copyright violation. You have to look at the source code and show that it came from the same original author.

So, some people are going to accuse other people no matter what you do. They are the same people who spend their time flaming posts in newsgroups, or trolling forums, or annoying you in a game. Some people just like to cause grief like this. Don't let that get to you. If you have a clear conscience that the code is your original creation, then that's what matters.

Well, that's probably enough senseless rambling from me too Wink

Wizard Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 1551 Location: Australia

Wizard Joined: 15 Jan 2002 Posts: 1644 Location: USA

Actually I think that is for released mods I'll look later to see if I can remember where I read it

Wizard Joined: 14 Oct 2000 Posts: 1368

Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 8:03 pm

Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 9:50 pm

Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 11:14 pm

I was reading a bit more about the GPL, and saw a few things I wanted to add.

First, it looks like you CAN sell copies of GPL'd code, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html for details if you're curious.

Two directly related FAQ listings I found:

"Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public?"
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic

"I would like to release a program I wrote under the GNU GPL, but I would like to use the same code in non-free programs."
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReleaseUnderGPLAndNF

I found out that you still maintain Copyright ownership of the code. So, even if you did release it under some kind of license, you retain ownership of the copyright and can still use it however you like (Including issuing it out under other licenses, I believe).

Nezic

I'd better stop researching this and get on my homework:P

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 4:43 pm

I hope I didn't kill the thread. Neutral

Nezic

Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 5:01 pm

No, you didn't. Thanks for the useful links. I am always interested in learning more about this as well.

I think it is pretty clear that the code Rorso wrote is his and he can do what he wants with it. I think that there was some concern that he might be forced to make it GPL because it acts as a MOD to existig GPL (phpbb) software. But from reading the links you gave, I think it's pretty clear that this isn't the case and that Rorso would always maintain the ownership of his code and the right to do what he wants with it.

At this point I'm not actually sure if Rorso is afraid of the phpBB GPL, or if he's afraid of me somehow. I hope he's not afraid of me and I think the links above show that his code would not get sucked into the phpBB GPL unless he wanted it to.

And yes, software patents are really scary. I actually know a software patent lawyer. It seems that copyright laws were too vague and so many people and groups seeking money have started down the patent path because it's rules are more well defined for traditional patents and can be horribly twisted in the world of software. They are taking advantage of a system that was never designed for this kind of stuff. I'm not sure how they are going to fix the patent system to deal with these new abuses and yet still keep it intact as the protection for intellectual property it was originally designed for. It's going to take several big cases to decide precident in this and I just hope they find some reasonable judges that really understand the long-term ramifications of what they are doing.

Too bad we just can't have a "common sense" rule. "I'm sorry, you are obviously being greedy and trying to abuse the patent system. Case thown out. Next!" But no, we can't trust people to have common sense any more.

The amount of time and resources our society spends on "bad" people is truely staggering.

Wizard Joined: 14 Oct 2000 Posts: 1368

I am a bit tired now as I didn't get much sleep tonight but I am still going to try to answer. First of all I don't dislike you Zugg. I consider you to be a friend.

It is true that the GPL scares me though.

Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 5:51 pm

Thanks for clarifying this Rorso. I think I have a much better picture of where you are coming from on this now. I agree with a lot that you have said. I don't take it quite as far as you do, but I definitely understand. It's going to be interesting to see what happens to GPL when the younger people that tend to support it "grow up" and try to find a *real* programming job that pays them real money.

As you said correctly, "users" would love it if zMUD were free. But then I'd be gone. So, would zMUD ever exist in the first place? How many quality programs have not been written because of this?

On a lighter note...Hmm, I *do* have some t-shirts I could sell...hmmm....

Wizard Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 1551 Location: Australia

Yeah, I was going to say "if Rorso won't give you the source code for his zscript highlighter, I'll write ya one for a tshirt" *halo*

I do need a new tshirt anyway, my 'All Your Base' tshirt has faded. My 'Devil Doll + Radiskull' tshirt has started getting holes in it. My 'Final Fantasy 8' tshirt is threadbare. My 'Dungeon Siege' tshirt always was 1 size to small and I've put on more weight recently. All these nerdy shirts are falling into disrepair. I'll hafta go to www.thinkgeek.com and buy some for myself instead of my girl hehe (girls look good in nerdy shirts btw Wink

).

Magician Joined: 09 Oct 2003 Posts: 459 Location: USA

I like my now discontinued tshirt I got from www.thinkgeek.com which had a modified VW logo that was instead WWW and said 'Hackers Wanted' below it. I also have the 'reenigne esrever' ('reverse engineer' reversed) tshirt.

If you really want a free tshirt, sign up for a microsoft event one month and go. Last time I went, I nabbed 2 tshirts (one technet and one msdn).