The Mana World Forums

what about the license?
which one yu will chose?

When registering the project on sourceforge I choosed GPL, but I read it only a little. If you have any suggestion...

i dont have any suggestion about the client but the server dont seem to be totaly-free is it a danger for us?

right licence..

i not sure of that maybe elven knows..

i think there is no problem with the server.

Because we don't emulate RO, we just use the RO-Protokoll to make a own game.

Gravity is only against : emulating RO-Servers, Hacking the Client (change the sakray.exe to work with emulated servers)

not even using ro client,
just its protocol

No problem about the server, the license is very strictive in some ways , especially on hacking the code but we're not doing it. In the future we'll need something to change maps and this will be made by The_Harbinger who is the only programmer of Vidar server so I don't think there should be any problem.
About the client well it's made by me and you, we can do everything we want until we don't use other people's graphic or music.
I don't think the protocol is under any license so I can sey we're totally legal ( I hope )

i think wee need to provide a license to protect the code and other things
we wouldnt know someone might do some damages with it

GPL is nice for that. Its conditions (summary) are:

- If someone hands you the binary, he must give you a way to obtain the sources.

- You are able to modify the sources to your wish.

- If you want to distribute the modifications, or the unchanged program, you must provide the sources including modifications to them (this is important, noone can close the source). Oh, and modifications must be under the GPL license too.

- You can't change copyrights on the source parts made by others (no attribution of others' work).

And the thing most people have troubles with:

- The license can't be changed unless all the developers that own copyrights to the source (from creation to tiny patches) grant permission.

I suggest a deep reading before settling for it, though. Although it's my favorite free license, it might not be adequate for some projects.

P.S.: and if a program links to a GPL library, the program must be GPL or using a less restrictive license (like modern MIT or BSD licenses).

well thank you although you should register , i think i might take off guest posting ..

Well, since I won't have time to help the project, not even browse the forums, It'd be cumbersome for me to register to this forum.

Anyway, keep up the good job, but take care with licenses. They are pretty important in projects that use collaboration thru the internet.

I think the thing most people have trouble with is the meaning of "free" as used in the gnu gpl. The fact that it is GPL does not mean I can not sell GPLed software for lots and lots of money. It also doesn't mean you can break the GPL as long as your not making money off of it.

Elven Programmer wrote:I don't think the protocol is under any license so I can sey we're totally legal ( I hope Shocked )

I am not a lawyer, but I can say with some degree of certainty that you are in the clear even if you do use the same protocol. As far as my understanding of the law goes, you can only copyright code or other such finite things. They could, in theory, patent the protocol, (or not, as there is really nothing innovative about it) but it's pretty clear that they haven't done this, as it would be grounds to shut down any attempt to create a private server (using the official client or not). Also to back up my line of thinking, reverse engineering for the purpose of compatability has, many times, been held legal in court (even with the dreaded DMCA we Americans have). This is why other Free and Open Source projects such as GAIM or MirandaIM can use the AIM, MSN or Y! protocols without fear of legal action.

As for the GPL, it is an excellent license to use for such a project as it guarantees the freedom to alter the program if need be, it guarantees that someone else can't just take your program, incorporate it into a proprietary program and claim it as their own, and it has been tested in several courts around the world (and been found legal in all that I'm aware of).[/quote]

Hey you're a lawyer instead. Anyway thank you, I'm glad to hear that, so TMW will be safe at least until the development of the new server.

The fact that it is GPL does not mean I can not sell GPLed software for lots and lots of money.

Common misconception about the GPL. I could easily take the source and the binaries, stick it on a CD and sell it online at 10$ a pop or something. As long as I provide the source and a copy of the license (and copyright info- I think) it's perfectly a-ok. But the GPL also grants the people who buy it from me the same right, as well as the right to give it away for free.

How do you think Redhat et al can bundle up GPL's software onto CD's and sell them at retail stores? If the GPL didn't have this stipulation, I think that OSS would be worse for the wear.