Weird impy thing
User Control Panel | Member List | FAQ | Privacy Policy | Blogs | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Classic Doom > Source Ports > Source code license question
 
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:04. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Blastfrog
Formerly Sodaholic


Posts: 4415
Registered: 04-07


So, I've been quietly working on CocoJag in the background, which is a modified version of Chocolate Doom trying to emulate the Jaguar version's behavior as closely as possible.

I don't really know that much about licensing, but I'm unsure of its compatibility with GPL. It states "Under no circumstances shall you commercially exploit the Software.". While I have no intention of commercially exploiting anything at all, it seems to be in conflict with GPL's stance that you have the right to exploit it commercially. In another section, it states "you may use portions of the Source Code, such as particular routines, to develop your own software, but may not duplicate the Source Code". I've only been copying definitions and other parts of the code where they differ from the PC version's code, and even then, I'm trying to retain as much of the original PC code as possible while keeping the same behavior as Jaguar Doom so that it can function as intended while trying to tread on this license as little as possible.

I've also been editing the existing PC code (parts with slightly different structure than the Jaguar version's, such as the status bar code) to have the same behavior (such as alignments and such) without directly copying any code from the Jaguar source itself. Should I continue this approach with the rest of the code and avoid using the Jaguar license, or are the Jaguar license and GPL actually compatible so that I would not need to do this?

Old Post Aug 7 2012 19:12 #
Blastfrog is offline || Blog || PM || Post History || Add Buddy IP || Edit || Quote
fraggle
Registered just to make one post


Posts: 9213
Registered: 12-99



Sodaholic said:
I don't really know that much about licensing, but I'm unsure of its compatibility with GPL.

Compatibility of what with the GPL?

Old Post Aug 7 2012 22:29 #
fraggle is offline Twitter account Youtube Twitch Github || Blog || PM || Post History || Add Buddy IP || Edit || Quote
Gez
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 14534
Registered: 07-07


Of that: http://www.atariage.com/Jaguar/archives/DoomSource/

Old Post Aug 7 2012 22:58 #
Gez is offline || Blog || PM || Post History || Add Buddy IP || Edit || Quote
chungy
Senior Member


Posts: 2265
Registered: 06-05


That's just the original Doom source license; it is not compatible with the GPL (neither is it free software nor open source). I would guess that nobody is really going to care if you treat it as GPLv2-or-later as the PC Doom source code was relicensed later on as, but I would take the safe side and try to email someone at id and see if you can get the license officially changed to GPL.

Old Post Aug 8 2012 00:59 #
chungy is offline Youtube Github || Blog || PM || Post History || Add Buddy IP || Edit || Quote
Quasar
Moderator


Posts: 7233
Registered: 02-00



chungy said:
That's just the original Doom source license; it is not compatible with the GPL (neither is it free software nor open source). I would guess that nobody is really going to care if you treat it as GPLv2-or-later as the PC Doom source code was relicensed later on as, but I would take the safe side and try to email someone at id and see if you can get the license officially changed to GPL.

What you'll more likely get is Carmack's patented "I don't think anybody will care what you do with it."

Old Post Aug 8 2012 02:56 #
Quasar is offline Twitter account Youtube Github || Blog || PM || Post History || Add Buddy IP || Edit || Quote
Blastfrog
Formerly Sodaholic


Posts: 4415
Registered: 04-07



chungy said:
try to email someone at id and see if you can get the license officially changed to GPL.

That's what I was considering, but I'm worried that they wouldn't respond or even read my email.

Quasar said:
What you'll more likely get is Carmack's patented "I don't think anybody will care what you do with it."

Chances are Zenimax isn't going to give a crap, but I still want to make sure that it's "defacto" legal, as I don't want it to be rejected from any hosts, nor do I want the community to take issue with it.

Old Post Aug 8 2012 03:14 #
Blastfrog is offline || Blog || PM || Post History || Add Buddy IP || Edit || Quote
chungy
Senior Member


Posts: 2265
Registered: 06-05



Sodaholic said:
That's what I was considering, but I'm worried that they wouldn't respond or even read my email.

johnc@idsoftware.com usually responds.

Sodaholic said:
Chances are Zenimax isn't going to give a crap, but I still want to make sure that it's "defacto" legal, as I don't want it to be rejected from any hosts, nor do I want the community to take issue with it.

I doubt most of the community will take issue with it as long as it's the DSL->GPL direction you're trying to go.

Old Post Aug 8 2012 05:16 #
chungy is offline Youtube Github || Blog || PM || Post History || Add Buddy IP || Edit || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:04. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
 
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Classic Doom > Source Ports > Source code license question

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright vBulletin Solutions, Inc.