 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
Sorry no one showed interest. I played makaqu on my old dreamcast before and thought it was brilliant.
Who could blame you for not making a new one. I should really try to pick up another DC some day now that I'm remembering it. But Happy 20th B-day Quake! One more, and we can go drinking: http://i.imgur.com/aEBhyUk.jpg
Dumb indie dev here.
Anyone know roughly how much a proprietary id Tech 2 license costs? My google skills seem to be pretty weak here. Also, assuming I got an id tech 2 license - then let's say I wanted to use a modded engine written by someone else - how would that work? Would it "just" be a case of negotiating a separate deal with the engine modders to include their code in my proprietary licensed game? Id doesn't license any of their engines anymore. GPL is your only option.
Ok...so as I understand it, there's still nothing stopping anyone from charging money for a game based on a GPL'd engine, but of course you have to make the source code available free of charge. Does this mean all the assets (models, textures etc) fall under the GPL - or is it just the engine code - i.e. would I still retain exclusive rights to all the new art assets I've created? Or... does it work like this... Because the game includes GPL software (the engine), then although nothing stops me selling the game for money, once someone has bought a copy, they are then allowed to distribute the entire game themselves freely? (engine, assets, the whole package)
I suck at all this legal stuff. Per the GPL, the code must be open sourced. Assets don't fall under this stipulation.
No, people who buy your game do not have the right to distribute your entire game. They have access to the source code, which they can look at, modify, sell (modified & GPL'd), etc. Right, thanks, so this is where it starts to feel rather skeevy to me...
Am I correct in saying the following is legal...a team of artists bang out a game that uses someone's modified quake engine (call it "EngineX", but imagine it could be any popular Quake engine mod). This team then put the game on Steam for $$$, and include only the source code for EngineX (which they have to under the GPL licence). Meanwhile, the author(s) of EngineX wake up one morning to find all their hard work being used in a commercial game that they knew nothing about and is just making cash for someone that's not them? The author of engineX is bound by the GPL to accept that scenario. Id software set the terms when they released the original source code.
There are tools to automatically block Tor exit nodes. http://mikhailian.mova.org/node/194
A lot of sites have them. It would also block the guy who is asking all the GPL questions who is using Tor, which is probably the same guy. The author of engineX is bound by the GPL to accept that scenario. Id software set the terms when they released the original source code.
Ok, Thanks for clearing that up. I understand now. I think this is the same guy that insulted Kinn in the Quakespasm thread. It would also block the guy who is asking all the GPL questions who is using Tor, which is probably the same guy. I have only ever posted in this thread here, now, asking these questions. It seems you are accusing me of being someone else because I am using Tor - I am using Tor because I am posting from work. I work at a financial institution and we are only ever allowed to access the internet at work via Tor - for reasons that I am not entirely clear about - and probably shouldn't speculate about on a public forum! Anyway, thanks for your help guys, you have been most informative. There now exists a video of me explaining the benefits of virtual reality night clubs to a group of 40 people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| You must be logged in to post in this thread. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2024 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |