Base ganymede being sold with FreeDoom on ITunes store

http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/doomsday-iii-base-ganymede/id504559484?mt=8

IIRC he was getting away with this because the licenses of the programs he was selling did not forbid commercial use, but I'm sure selling PWADS crosses some legal line.

Apparently more levels are coming soon! oh boy base ganymede e4 cant wait

I'm sure we all know this, but does this count as exploiting the software? (http://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_Source_License)

3.Prohibited Uses: Under no circumstances shall you, (cut out) or any portion thereof:

Rent;

Sell;

Lease;

Offer on a pay-per-play basis;

Distribute for money or any other consideration; or

In any other manner and through any medium whatsoever
commercially exploit or use for any commercial purpose.

Notwithstanding the foregoing prohibitions, you may commercially
exploit the software you develop by exercising the Educational Use
right, referenced in paragraph 2. hereinabove.

I wonder if Apple's going to do anything?

BloodyAcid said:

I wonder if Apple's going to do anything?

If someone were to make a complaint then, yes, Apple would take it off in an instant.

So he just nabs a bunch of WADs and sells 'em?

Genius!

BloodyAcid said:

I'm sure we all know this, but does this count as exploiting the software? (http://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_Source_License)
I wonder if Apple's going to do anything?

Wrong license. I lifted the following from Ultimate Doom's LICENSE.DOC.

2. Commercial Use is Prohibited: Under no circumstances shall you, the end
user, be permitted, allowed or authorized to commercially exploit the Software, any
data comprising the Software (whether modified by you or otherwise) or any maps you
make regarding the Software (collectively referred to as the "Materials"). Neither you
nor anyone at your direction shall do the following acts with regard to the Materials:

a. Rent the Materials;

b. Sell the Materials;

c. Lease the Materials;

d. Offer the Materials on a pay-per-play basis;

e. Distribute the Materials for money or other consideration; or

f. In any manner and through any medium whatsoever commercially exploit the
Materials or use the Materials for any commercial purpose.

Apart from that, if they're Khorus' maps Apple shouldn't just brush off any complaint he lodges. Has anyone informed him?

I think this one looks bad for all involved.

Engine: GPL
Freedoom: also a free license, I believe that allows commercial use
Ganymede: Doesn't make any restrictions on distribution.


So I guess there's nobody to stop this asshole.

Khorus should still demand a cut since they're his maps. They're good maps too. He should be paid for his hard work if possible.

Some people don't have any fucking manners. FREEdoom cost money? :/

The "free" in Freedoom refers to freedom, not price.

The text file for base ganymede actually says (bizarrely) that "You may NOT distribute this file in any format". So Khorus can rightfully file a copyright claim with Apple and get it taken down if he wishes.

At the very least it's nothing to do with Id or any of their licenses - Graf Zahl correctly points out that the Doom engine is GPL, and Freedoom is BSD licensed - both of which permit commercial use.

The "free" in Freedoom could refer to pineapples, it still wouldn't make what is happening here any less despicable.

Yeah I hope that guy gets raped.

fraggle said:

The "free" in Freedoom refers to freedom, not price.

The text file for base ganymede actually says (bizarrely) that "You may NOT distribute this file in any format". So Khorus can rightfully file a copyright claim with Apple and get it taken down if he wishes.

At the very least it's nothing to do with Id or any of their licenses - Graf Zahl correctly points out that the Doom engine is GPL, and Freedoom is BSD licensed - both of which permit commercial use.

Take another look at the file for the complete 3 episode project.

For lazy people.

Authors MAY use the contents of this file as a base for modification or reuse. Permissions have been obtained from original authors for any of their resources modified or included in this file.

You MAY distribute this file, provided you include this text file, with no modifications. You may distribute this file in any electronic format (BBS, Diskette, CD, etc) as long as you include this file intact. I have received permission from the original authors of any modified or included content in this file to allow further distribution.

Does the Freedoom have this part?

So what you're saying is that people are going to have to start adding no-commercial use clauses to their wads? Isn't this a violation of SOME copyright law? If not, why the hell has it taken this long for someone to try selling another's work?

Yeah, isn't it implied that pwads can't be sold? Or does that mean any mapper can sell their wad legally?

And what's up with the © 2012 (c) General Arcade on that guy's page?

Khorus can certainly complain that his copyright has been violated. I think this idiot was stupid enough, not to include the text file - which is a requirement for distribution. If he's misrepresenting others' works as his own there's not much that could help him defending his actions.

Regarding the general situation, yes it is certainly advisable to add 'no commercial use' clauses to released PWADs. That'd make it a lot easier to take down these thieves.

fraggle said:

The "free" in Freedoom refers to freedom, not price.

I'd say it refers to both freedom and price. No one ever paid for a copy of FreeDOOM.

Given that this is what, the third commercialization of Freedoom, I think some people actually did.

Vordakk said:

I'd say it refers to both freedom and price. No one ever paid for a copy of FreeDOOM.

Wrong. Multiple apps are already on sale on the Apple app store, based on the Freedoom material, and this is perfectly legitimate: there have been several past threads in the Freedoom forum about this. Also, from the very start of the project, one of the main aims has been to develop an IWAD that can be included eg. in Linux distributions, many of which are commercially sold. Basically, the aim of the Freedoom project has always been to develop an IWAD file that is free under the Free Software definition, and commercial use is a necessary prerequisite for this.

fraggle said:

Wrong. Multiple apps are already on sale on the Apple app store, based on the Freedoom material, and this is perfectly legitimate: there have been several past threads in the Freedoom forum about this. Also, from the very start of the project, one of the main aims has been to develop an IWAD that can be included eg. in Linux distributions, many of which are commercially sold. Basically, the aim of the Freedoom project has always been to develop an IWAD file that is free under the Free Software definition, and commercial use is a necessary prerequisite for this.

???

If I'm gonna be spending money, I might as well buy the real thing. Why would I purchase FreeDOOM when I can just buy the original id Software product?

The whole "Free Software definition" seems like a verbose way to make something sound more important than it is. That link you provided is fucking laughable. Here's an actual quote from it.

When users don't control the program, the program controls the users. The developer controls the program, and through it controls the users. This nonfree or “proprietary” program is therefore an instrument of unjust power.

What tree-hugging commie fuck authored that garbage? Why, Green Party supporter Richard Stallman of course. "Whoa dude, my software's controlling me! It's so intense! Oh nooooooooes!" What a joke.

I certainly don't agree with everything Richard Stallman says - in fact I strongly disagree with a lot of what he says. I'm simply explaining what the word means in this context.

Vordakk said:

What tree-hugging commie fuck authored that garbage? Why, Green Party supporter Richard Stallman of course. "Whoa dude, my software's controlling me! It's so intense! Oh nooooooooes!" What a joke.

Yeah, I can understand why you'd find it easy to casually dismiss this stuff. Certainly a project like Freedoom is pretty trivial and irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. In the larger, general sense, though, I think it is a bit more important than that.

Marcaek said:

So what you're saying is that people are going to have to start adding no-commercial use clauses to their wads?

Probably.

Isn't this a violation of SOME copyright law?

Not sure. Doom's license originally contained a "Permitted Derivative Works" clause (see below), which was replaced by the "Commercial Use" section in my previous post. Either of those should have made "no commercial use" clauses in PWAD text files unnecessary. Depending on where you purchased your copy, Activision's license for the Collector's Edition of 2003 may include a "Permitted New Creations" section (myk's did, mine didn't) which also prohibits commercial use. Don't know what the story is with copies purchased through Steam, anyone care to copy/paste that license?

"You may not: rent, lease, modify, translate, disassemble, decompile, reverse engineer, or create derivative works based upon the Software.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, you may create a map editor, modify maps and make your own maps (collectively referenced as the "Permitted Derivative Works") for the Software. You may not sell or distribute any Permitted Derivative Works but you may exchange the Permitted Derivative Works at no charge amongst other end-users."

While I can't find a reference to it right now, several shovelware CD publishers were apparently taken to court back in the 90's for selling PWADs without a license. IIRC, the case was settled out of court for a six digit sum.

If not, why the hell has it taken this long for someone to try selling another's work?

New market, new opportunities.

GreyGhost said:

New market, new opportunities.

More like the Doom community wasn't trying to make a cent out of a passion or hobby.

Maybe this guy is Khorus.

In the larger, general sense, though, I think it is a bit more important than that.

I wish the lesson people would learn from this comic is that extremism doesn't work, regardless of the side you pick.

The titlescreen alone looks like a fairly clear trademark infringement on Doom.

GreyGhost said:

Probably.
Not sure. Doom's license originally contained a "Permitted Derivative Works" clause (see below), which was replaced by the "Commercial Use" section in my previous post. Either of those should have made "no commercial use" clauses in PWAD text files unnecessary.

Nothing of this applies anymore because it requires 2 things:


- distribution of the original Doom.exe. Any source port using the GPL is free for commercial use under certain conditions
- distribution of original IWAD content. As long as the use Freedoom this won't be the case.

Based on these 2 items you are allowed to make a commercial project.

* Standard disclaimer - IANAL*

Okay, they've probably covered themselves so far the IWAD and executable are concerned, but I still think they're on shaky ground when it comes to "Permitted Derivative Works". If commercial exploitation of such works is still prohibited under the Doom license - it's game over for this thief. The PWAD author can't over-ride that prohibition and the fact that it's being run by a GPL executable with a GPL IWAD is probably of no relevance.

Oh wow, I'm very touched by all the support. Thanks to those who contacted me about this!

For my part, the guy contacted me a day after I released the wad and after a few emails he obtained my permission. I had no real idea whether he had the rights to do what he did with others content, such matters are not my specialty. If such a selfish attitude has damaged the community, then I apologise.

Feel free to take action against the "product" should you see reason to do so, it's no skin off my back haha.

Sorry for the mess. :) I'll go back to lurking 'n shit.

Marcaek said:

Apparently more levels are coming soon! oh boy base ganymede e4 cant wait

Hm, that's interesting. I have no plans at all for making more Ganymede and I sure as fiddlesticks wouldn't make it exclusive.

NaturalTvventy said:

Maybe this guy is Khorus.

Hahaha, I might have ego but I'm not that much of a douche.

Khorus said:

Hahaha, I might have ego but I'm not that much of a douche.

Would it really be douchey to sell your work as an app for 99c? Seems like if there's no legal restrictions it's a nice way to find a new audience and earn a wee bit of cash as well.

It sounds like the legalities are a little unclear at this point though. At least to me.