Question to developers and contributors

Hayate · Post by **Hayate** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:06 am

Question to developers:
Is my idea is legal and moral?

I am thinking about porting Oolite to iPhone.
As far as I understand, Oolite 1.65 and its artwork could be licensed under GPL.
So, if i would do the following:
1) Port Oolite to iPhone
2) Submit source code modifications/build instructions to project svn and distribute it from my website
3) Put the compiled iPhone version into AppStore payed application section for those who do not want to deal with building it themselves

Would it be legal, moral and conforming to the license?

Lestradae · Post by **Lestradae** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:27 am

Hayate wrote:
3) Put the compiled iPhone version into AppStore payed application section for those who do not want to deal with building it themselves

Would it be legal, moral and conforming to the license?

While I am by no means competent to answer your question, I think that anything that puts Oolite into the position to have versions someone has to pay for would be a very bad idea legally. So, I think the answer will most probably be no.

Ahruman?

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:12 pm

As far as I’m concerned, it would be OK from a licensing perspective. (There is at least one paid GPLed app on the App Store as it is. I have confirmed that it’s possible to download, build and run the source without modifications, if you happen to have an iPhone developer programme membership. The GPL version 3 has a clause aimed specifically to stop this type of thing, but Oolite is GPL 2 (or a later version of your choice).)

However, a paid version of Oolite would no doubt draw the attention of sinister forces. What parts of Oolite’s code, text and graphics assets actually constitute derivative works of Elite is an interesting discussion, but not one any of us are in a position to hold in court. If we received a cease and desist letter, the project would have to close down regardless of its validity.

So, in short, please don’t.

Hayate · Post by **Hayate** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:23 pm

Ok, Ahruman, i've got a point.
While its not against the license, this is very undesirable.

I would like to hear from aegidian too, if he is still around the board.

Lestradae · Post by **Lestradae** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:02 pm

Ahruman wrote:
If we received a cease and desist letter, the project would have to close down regardless of its validity.

BTW Ahruman, if something like that ever happened, my lawyer is a quite reknown expert in at least european media law and I would be ready to ... contribute if that ever happened.

You do have my email adress.

Let's hope no one here nor there is stupid enough to do something that ever leads to such a situation

Greetings

L

wackyman465 · Post by **wackyman465** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:15 pm

Also writing an iPhone port would be very hard - not enough keys...

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:08 pm

On-screen interfaces aren’t that big a problem. It’s not much harder than designing an Elite interface for the NES.

Memory constraints and contractual restrictions on interpreted code would be bigger problems.

Captain Hesperus · Post by **Captain Hesperus** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:33 pm

This is where LittleBear usually baffles us with legalese....

Then tells us his speciality is Criminal Law, not Copyright Law.

Captain Hesperus

Lestradae · Post by **Lestradae** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:36 pm

Captain Hesperus wrote:
This is where LittleBear usually baffles us with legalese.... Then tells us his speciality is Criminal Law, not Copyright Law.

I think it's not relevant if anyone here understands the legal byzantine jungle that is international copyright law - in a worst case scenario, it would be relevant to have a lawyer who does.

Post by **Disembodied** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:33 pm

Well, I've worked for many years in publishing, although I'm far from being an expert in copyright law. A good rule of thumb, though, is "Whoever has the most money, wins".

Cmdr Wyvern · Post by **Cmdr Wyvern** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:26 pm

So far, Braben hasn't had the ammo to attack oolite legally, so has left the project alone.
Let's not give Braben's gang of bloodsuckers a legal foothold to launch an assault, hmm?

Lestradae · Post by **Lestradae** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:31 pm

Cmdr Wyvern wrote:
So far, Braben hasn't had the ammo to attack oolite legally, so has left the project alone.

Well ... there is also the question if he should have any sort of motivation to attack this game.

A few thousand people play it, perhaps ten thousand all in all? Most of them Elite enthusiasts no doubt, and potential future customers if ever Elite 4 left vaporware status. Not a really good idea to piss them all royally off by attacking a project into which about 200 people have been investing work for five years or so.

So, perhaps there is no bad intention on his part at all. Oolite keeps the appetite for Elite alive after all.

Gimi · Post by **Gimi** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 1:44 pm

However, a paid version of Oolite would no doubt draw the attention of sinister forces. What parts of Oolite’s code, text and graphics assets actually constitute derivative works of Elite is an interesting discussion, but not one any of us are in a position to hold in court. If we received a cease and desist letter, the project would have to close down regardless of its validity.

So, in short, please don’t.

Two things:

This is an argument for changing the licence to GPL 3. Would that be possible, and would there be other undesired effects. Note that it was after someone started selling a port of Elite TNK, that Braben intervened. And it is sort of understandable that he feels he has to intervene when someone earns money of his intellectual property. So I would suggest making sure that the licence specifically forbids it.

Next thing is that Braben holds 50% of the rights to Elite. Don't know who holds the other half, don't think it is Bell any more. So attention could be drawn form other directions.

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 2:00 pm

Gimi wrote:
This is an argument for changing the licence to GPL 3. Would that be possible, and would there be other undesired effects. Note that it was after someone started selling a port of Elite TNK, that Braben intervened. And it is sort of understandable that he feels he has to intervene when someone earns money of his intellectual property. So I would suggest making sure that the licence specifically forbids it.

The GPL version 3 does not prohibit selling the software. It would, however, prohibit the creation of a free (gratis) iPhone version of Oolite. This strikes me as the exact opposite of helpful in this situation (and I find the anti-Tivoization clause objectionable as it’s yet another restriction on “free” software developer freedom for ideological reasons).

On a tangent, it should be noted that any version of Oolite packaged with components from GNUstep-base 1.15 or later (I think it is) is automatically GPLv3, since GNUstep is now LGPLv3, Oolite is GPLv2 or later, and GPLv2 and LGPLv3 are incompatible. This doesn’t affect a potential iPhone port, though.

ClymAngus · Post by **ClymAngus** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 2:12 pm

I suggest we wait for some other sucker to set up an "e-l-i-t-e" game for the i-p-h-o-n-e (it will happen it is inevitable). Wait for the inevitable legal turd storm to swallow them whole, then continue as if nothing ever happened. I suggest it would also be quite handy if the words e-l-i-t-e and i-p-h-o-n-e plugged into google didn't bring this page up at the top of the list.

Oolite Bulletins

Question to developers and contributors

Question to developers and contributors

Re: Question to developers and contributors

.

..

..