project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: GNU Licenced sounds repository  (Read 6455 times)

Offline Zenerka

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
GNU Licenced sounds repository
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2007, 10:18:08 am »
Quote from: "Bandobras"
However, with non-commercial licenses you cannot modify and distribute e.g. on a DVD accompanying a magazine, or on a DVD with a Linux distribution sold for close to shipping costs, or preinstalled on a computer, possibly even downloaded from a site with any ads on it.

Altough I am not quite convinced that we cannot add UFO:AI to the DVD with magazine, because in such case the magazine with all add-ons is being sold, not UFO:AI, i really DO understand what do you mean. And we are aware of it, see http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Talk:License . :)
Quote from: "Bandobras"
And there is another problem, the one wit incompatibility between licenses. The non-commercial clause is one of many causes of such incompatibility. In the effect, UFO:AI would not be distributable as one work, but as a set of several packages, each under different license.

Yes, something like that in the end, unfortunately. But there is not really other way (the way remove-all-our-cc-data-and-create-them-again-under-GPL is out of the question).
Quote from: "Bandobras"
And it still can be illegal, because the separate parts are obviously meant to be used as a single work, so we violate some of the licenses.

No, I don't agree on that, why? If the stuff contains X part on the X-A license and Y part on the Y-B license, everything is OK as long as you will provide ToS saying that stuff contains X on the X-A and Y on the Y-B, I believe.

Offline Bandobras

  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
GNU Licenced sounds repository
« Reply #16 on: August 03, 2007, 10:02:04 pm »
Quote from: "Zenerka"
(the way remove-all-our-cc-data-and-create-them-again-under-GPL is out of the question)


Why not? We've created it once, we can create it again. ;)

Seriously though, it would require asking every single person that contributed under any license than the one we want to keep (and compatibles) to double-license his works. It can be done, e.g. people did it with the games Moria and Angband.

I'm hope I'm mistaken, but I'm afraid, we have no choice. Even if there are no maps with textures and in-map models under incompatible licenses, even if the whole game is not legally a derived work of all of its artistic components, there will still happen such cases as a screenshot on which you see a map under CC-by-sa, fonts under GPL and aliens under CC-by-nc or an in-game video with a soundtrack mixing elements under incompatible licenses. The person that publishes such a screenshot or broadcasts such a soundtrack is then violating the licenses...

I guess what we can get away with is a separate licence for the code (GNU GPL), another one for sounds _and_ music and another one for the rest (visual and textual content together --- they are sometimes displayed on the same screen). But we would have to ask for advice some specialized lawyers (FSF? CC?).

Offline Zenerka

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
GNU Licenced sounds repository
« Reply #17 on: August 03, 2007, 11:30:52 pm »
Quote from: "Bandobras"
Seriously though, it would require asking every single person that contributed under any license than the one we want to keep (and compatibles) to double-license his works. It can be done, e.g. people did it with the games Moria and Angband.

If you ask me, I would vote for just preparing ToS with proper arrangement of info including licenses for our stuff. There is nothing wrong with claiming that some of our stuff is released under X and some under Y. And hell, that is the way better way than double licensing or reengineering the stuff. IMO :)