Quasar
Moderator

Posts: 4615
Registered: 08-00 |
myk said:
http://www.doomworld.com/comments/813.shtml
Is the anonymous user on that thread saying MBF is GPL Lee Killough?
Quasar, that doesn't mean a source port under the old license is illegal, it means the source code used is owned by id Software, and that it may not be distributed for profit (only bits of code used for educational purposes may be used for profit, as stated at the end of paragraph 3.) It does not otherwise prohibit distributing the Source Code, only the Software.
Lee Killough never posted on the Doomworld forums to my knowledge. If he did, he certainly didn't after leaving the DOOM community, which he did a long time before MBF was made GPL.
2. Permitted Uses. For educational purposes only, you, the
end-user, may use portions of the Source Code, such as particular
routines, to develop your own software, but may not duplicate the
Source Code, except as noted in paragraph 4.
This says you can make a new software product which contains some parts of the source code. It does NOT say you can take the source code in its entirety, change 500 out of its 100,000 lines, and then release it as a DOOM port, no, in fact it says you cannot do that by saying that you cannot duplicate the source code. Also, paragraph 4, which talks about the "Software," adds no further permissions to what you can do with the "Source Code," so that exception there is unnecessary.
But, exactly how much code CAN you use in a project and have it still be considered educational use of portions of the source? This is where the vagueness I speak of above comes in. This provision would not stand up in a court, I think, and it would be thrown out as unenforceable, more than likely.
I've tired of this subject now, though, so I probably won't be posting here any more. Its just getting repetitive because people aren't paying attention to what the license actually says, and after all, who cares anyways :P
Last edited by Quasar on 10-17-02 at 02:24
|