I thought this would be an open source game!!!

[politikerNEU]

I\'ve found this MMORPG on a site saying this would be the best open source roleplaying game. I, however, have read the licence of this game which tells something quite different.
Instead of making the game free to use, distribute, spread and modify most things are actually under a proprietary licence no commercial game is worse. Take, for example, the guild wars client. It\'s free (of charge) too, the data, however, does cost, how can I know that this wouldn\'t be the case here too?
And this ABC licence (maybe some relationship with weapons of mass destruction - many people play this game and suddenly nobody is able to do it any longer because ABC makes the server with costs - you are not allowed to set up your own server) does also make it impossible for european authors to contribute to this project because it is not possible to give away their copyright but I think that it would not be a problem if the all the data here is aviable under this M$-like licence if the author would not be required to not use HIS data in HIS own or other programs any more ... too good i\'m not a designer but sometimes I try to contribute some code to some projects (since I\'m currently not very good in coding, this isn\'t very successfull but that\'s not so important now) but I for myself am sure that I won\'t even use this program because I think a commercial product is at least honest while this project is not.

Please bash me, delete me, or do anything you want. I\'ll look up this article later; i do not just write this and leave forever

----------------------------------------------------------------------
sorry for my bad english, i am austrian

*edit*

and I\'ve got just something to add something regarding the player\'s policy: in Austria, since the new spelling reform, it is perfectly valid to have three letters in a row in a correctly spelled word.
For example, take Schifffahrt (consisting of Schiff (ship) and fahrt (~drive)) (navigation) or many other useful words so it would be nice if someone could put this limit up to four letters (even they *could* be possible)

Please avoid posting two or more successive posts before others have replied. Just edit your last post to add new information :) Thanks! --Karyuu

Oh ... I  didn\'t know i am able to edit the posts ... in my main forum i am not ... sorry

[Karyuu]

It\'s not recommended to use actual words from other languages for names, although it\'s certainly alright as long as they are not offensive. However, to modify the Naming Rules to accomodate every language in the world is a silly thing. We have certain Naming Rules, so if some word you want to use doesn\'t work, drop a letter. It\'s not a big deal. Frankly seeing four of the same letter one after another in a name is irritating.

I\'ll let others address the license issue.

[Xordan]

It is open source. The source code is open. If you have read the license and the site then you would know that we have the art/data/music under a seperate license (owned by a registered non-profit corporation I should mention; http://www.atomicblue.org) to;
a) stop people from withdrawing content which they have contributed, which would seriously hinder our development.
b) make this game fun. Releasing the data for all our quests and such isn\'t what I call fun. There\'s no point in playing if 3/4 of people are just reading spoilers.
c) Stop people from grabbing our game and setting it up on their own servers. Our devs work hard on our game, and to see someone else just take it all and use it for themselves with no effort or work on their part isn\'t very nice. Our code is open so that people can use our structure to create their own project, as has been done.

[steuben]

best reread the lisences again. the server and client are open sourced. the art work is not.

but to answer your question. really you don\'t. but then you don\'t know if you won\'t be hit by a bus tomorrow. but, i would place more safe money on this game staying free then i would on, something riskier that i can\'t think of right now.

edit: i\'ve really got to learn how to troubleshoot, talk, and write these posts at the same time...

[politikerNEU]

No, I know many authors do not want to release their artwork and data to the public, that is correct and so they should free to do so (only US people, the others (i.e. european) are not allowed to) and licence it under the ABC licence.
Thats not a great problem. I think, however, that there is NO reason why a contributer schould not use his own graphics in his own game or other games if he wants to. Actually, you cannot forbid this if the author lives in europe because it is simply not allowed to give away the copyright and as author you have always (at least until 70 years after your death) the right to do anything with your creationships, and thats my problem.

I can only repeat what I have said: Of course Atomic Blue can tell the truth  and the game stays free but why the hell should they then reap everything away a nice man has done to let the project benefit.

    *  The materials will only be used in the PlaneShift game (or its successor games created by Atomic Blue) and not in any other.
    * The materials, once contributed, will be retained by Atomic Blue no matter what might happen with other projects, forks, mergers, alliances, and Atomic Blue will control how it is used.

And at last, I don\'t believe in goodness of any concern any more. The lines above are so clear there\'s nothing to add more.

After Atomic Blue has got enough data, they will do the following:
Sucessor game = Commercial game based on non-open-source code
GPL-based-game = Server is closed (nobody is allowed to set one up so nobody can use it)
==> everybody who contributes to this project is in risk to contribute to a cash-greedy concern, this game is not open source
Nobody can tell me such licence restricions are only there for nothing but the benefit of the community. This licence is more restrective than the privacy terms of ICQ which allowes them to do everything they want with the data of the fobbed artworker/scripter.

I suggest to reread the licence, it\'s dangerous.

[zanzibar]

I think he means it\'s dishonest because the art is \"locked in\" to the project, and he doesn\'t see a gaurantee that the project won\'t \'turn commercial\' at a distant point in the future.

[politikerNEU]

Ok, I haven\'t read any other documents and i know the projects long six hours or something like that.
But I know how a dangerous licence sounds and that is a dangerous one.
And still it is forbidden for any european artist to give away the copyright, it is impossible because it is illegal in Europe.
I don\'t think there is any problem in reusing the graphics (since your licence isn\'t valid in my country i wouldn\'t have to care anyway) for the projects if they are good. If the author (of the art) thinks they should be used for another project then he should be allowed to do so because i personally don\'t think he wants to harm the project.
Where\'s the problem in double licencing the art or some useful scripts in GPL and ABC? Why are the contributers forced to not reuse their graphics any more, for example for glest or other games which do clearly have nothing to to with an MMORPG but they could be useful without disturbing the originality of this game here.
And at least I think a licence should be legal in nearly every country and not void in most countries except the U.S. (sometimes I am really glad to live in europe ... less software patents, less laws and courts bought by company directors, less validness of senseless but harmful licences like this, a better social system - and no George W. Bush, but politics are quite wrong here)


Oh, I have forgotten to say that basically I think souch a games is positive (as I have said before this game is regarded as one of the best MMORPG), the only things I criticise are these two paragraphs in the licence which could be harmfull ... and people cannot trust companies no matter if they declare that they are non-profit or something like that.

PS: Please be honest and say: this game is freeware and this could change every second. This would be honest

the reason I write here is that I know a software which had a developing procedure like this and it was promised forever that the software would be free forever but once you had to pay for it ... I don\'t want this to happen here again so please just allow developers to contribute everything they want to this project under the licence they want additional to your licence.
It\'s capitalism, everybody wants to make profit.

edit: zanzib?r is right, thats one of the greatest fears I have

[Bereror]

When I started with this game I had the same doubts and I spent a lot of time reading the AB license over and over again. Also the explanations, why that license was chosen. I suggest you do the same and think about it

To make the long story short, I have few arguments, why the license is as it is:

a) You make a 3D model and it gets added to the game. Later on you decide to leave the project and since it is your art, you demand it to be removed from the game. Do you think it is good for the game?

b) You disagree with the development team on something and decide to make a better game using the same art and game rules. You find people who will support you and start a new project instead of solving your issues with the development team and contributing to the current game. Would that benefit the Planeshift development?

[politikerNEU]

a) is wrong because impossible. If your model is double-licenced you cannot say: i want to have my model removed because it is property by Planeshift too, so this cannot be a problem

b) What\'s the Problem? If someone thinks he can make the game better then there is a fork which is sometimes better then the original. Also code could be added to both projects without any problem because the forked must be GPL anyway.
A argument is only able to happen if a/some developer(s) disagree about either new functions or the gameplay and actually it should be perfectly valid to create the forked project. And ... a fork doesn\'t happen so easily and if, then the result is good. Examples: emule (many mods) and vlc (\"You do not have to tell us if you make a fork\") - both very good programs.

Oh ... and i haven\'t understood why nobody is allowed to set up an own server ... could somebody explain please?

[steuben]

you\'re arguing two different things, and appear to be confusing them.

the code is gpl\'d, or something similar.

the art and rules are not. and is covered by approprate copyrights.

the art is \"the game\". the code is just how it is run.

if you want you can take the code. build a new game with new art. noone here would complain, and would probably play it.

the art is a different manner altogether. people would problably become... \"cross\" with you if you simply copied the art over to a different game.

[Bereror]

Originally posted by politikerNEU
Oh ... and i haven\'t understood why nobody is allowed to set up an own server ... could somebody explain please?

I have my own server There are no limitations setting up your own server. As far I know Arianna made a completely new game using the same sources, but not the game rules and art.

Planeshift team wants to create an unique game, the best MMORPG even seen. If you can contribute to the game, you are more than welcome, but forking it does not help on that goal.

Talad is actually very selective, which art gets into the game, so it is not that easy to contribute and you have to spend a lot of time and it takes a lot of effort to get something into the game.

[Karyuu]

You can have a server, but the key is that you can\'t make it a public \"open-to-everyone\" unofficial server, because there\'s no clean way to both moderate it and make sure things haven\'t been changed.

[Xordan]

Our license _is_ legal in non-US countries. I believe it has been checked by lawyers that it is so. And members _are_ allowed to use the work they\'ve done for their own portfolio. I should also point out that every member that joins signs a document agreeing to our licence, and therefore if they don\'t agree with it they don\'t work on the project. Simple as that. I don\'t see a problem there. Same goes for playing. Don\'t like it, don\'t play. You may check the 100\'s of threads about all this using our handy search feature. This isn\'t the first time someone has said \'omg your license sux\'. I also see that you don\'t know what \'non-profit\' means. If you did then you\'d have never said that ABC would create a commerical successor game in the future, based on all this data which can\'t legally be used for anything commercial.... It\'s like saying that a charity would one day use some of the money or items donated for profitable gain. I see your viewpoint that our license _could_ (with some serious effort and probably law breaking) be distorted in the future for profitable means, but I would certainally leave the dev team if that happened, and so probably would every other dev.  Not much of a profit would be made then.

[oneiros]

1) Yes, I\'m sure that Atomic Blue/\"the devs\" have had lawyers examine their licensing agreements. However, copyright law is in a state of flux right now, and international copyright is particularly dicey, and electronic copyright law more so, etc. If the license is ever actually tested in court, something none of us wants to see will have already happened in this project. The GPL is still being tested in courts as well, remember. Projects like this are breaking new ground in both their open and closed elements. There is no definitive truth about whether something is \"legal\" or \"illegal\" until it or something very like it has been tested in the courts, and I think we are are proud to say that PS is new and unique!

2) I would prefer that the art was freely distributable as well. But I honestly think that the policy was designed in good faith and that the license will be re-examined if it proves to be a problem. Keep in mind that open source developers and rendering artists, while sometimes the same people, are more often than not different individuals and different creative cultures. OSS devs generally want their work out there as much as possible, while artists can be sensitive about how their work is used- and with good reason. I think that many artist feel that the license is necessary to protect their craft, and we wouldn\'t want to lose those people. If they would rather trust Talad than trust the entire world, I think that\'s reasonable and we should respect it.

3) This game will never go commercial. It would lose a substantial part of its fan base and a huge chunk of its devs. The cost of restructuring the project would compromise all the advantages of an initial open source dev phase. Of course we are extending some trust. But contributors know what they are getting into and the rest of us aren\'t risking anything.

4) I\'m glad servers are kept on a short leash. Poorly maintained or inconsistently updated servers could damage the reputation of the game. I\'m sure Talad would be interested in adding another server maintained by someone qualified and integrated with the project. OSS projects must be very strict about performance if we want to be taken seriously in the software community.

I\'m sorry if this post is a bit lengthy, but the issues in this thread are often on my mind. Happy gaming, everyone!

[politikerNEU]

Actually the GPL is too only valid in Europe if you do not give away your copyright to the FSF which is too illegal here.

And another time, I don\'t see any problem if the artists are able to decide and want that their art does not appear in other games. But why must Planeshift force this way.

And it is not valid to abandon his own copyright and give it to another person or organisation, you are only able to share the rights of use and sale but you always have your copyright on your own work. For example, if you have drawn something in a i.e. film company you are able, if you want, to distribute these drawings after you have left this company (The company, however, is able to do so too)
I recommend translating this page with google and reading the copyright of an european country, here germany (because i for myself have read this law) http://transpatent.com/gesetze/urhg1.html