Well, in that case, this point can be safely dropped from the license, right?
No, it's not. I'd rather explicitly state that lets-plays are allowed w/o explicit permission ;)
As for ads - there are too many cases to judge those as a whole.
I may add a notice about personal sites which show ads so the site owner would get site up and running for free.
But if that's some corporation's site with ads (or anti-ads) I'd like to deal with them on a "personal" basis.
If you're just interested in demographics or statistics, it would be better (IMO) to make it a friendly request (the word “please”) which is not demand (read: a part of the actual license).
I tried to tell "please". I don't really want to tell the story yet another time, so... let's say that just didn't work.
I have no idea what you mean by “cheat”.
Demanding to fix bugs is rude enough but I have enough guts to say I won't work for someone for free.
And when there was an agreement and I did some work, I've got no money, credits were removed, license ignored, and me left with nothing but a stress. Thanks to the license I was able to shut down the "infringerator" (like in infringement)
Understandable. Just don't work together with such people. That's not a justification to restrict freedom of other people.
I'm through this, honestly.
I don't want to "hope" a man will be honest enough.
I don't want to turn my pleasure to a source of stress.
There's Ruben who tried to force me to change the license (and much more) and then upon pissing me off called me aggressive. I don't want yet another community member to repeat all of that.
What are you motives for asking me?
Whom do you represent?
If you want to help me - I'll consider your altruism.
I may even change the license back to GPL but on Debian-like terms for the Debian-like reasons.
In case all you want you just want to help some abstract supposable person, then I'm sorry, but I won't even try.
I need real ppl, not just some random guys/gals who only want to tear my game apart to have even more generic mods.
Thanks, but no thanks ;)
Well, I personally wouldn't recode everything just to avoid “blames”.
It's not "everything".
I've left everything WTFPL-licensed in there (sometimes unmodified at all - see "wool").
But GPL is a little bit different.
Some guys were kind enough to let me use GPL code as if it were WTFPL and asked me if I probably would release a WTFPL or GPL version of their mods. And I did precisely that by letting authors to use my code on the same terms they let me use their.
But sometimes the code was written by ppl who wouldn't have answered me (or at least I believe so) or I didn't want to ask.
Now, how one can not be blamed if he takes GPL code and changes its license?
I *had* to rewrite quite a lot.
And to be clear, I would not blaming you for using the work of everyone else.
Well, there are a lot of those who would and who do...
But that is very subjective and hypothetical. I believe there's no point in discussing that.
Well, you are playing with words here. You do not just want to be control over Magichet alone, because this control is pretty trivial: Just make stuff. With that part I have no problem.
No, because I'd end up again working for some guy I don't even know who sells my stuff.
I told that many times: If my game is to be profited upon, then I should and I will be the first to profit from it.
But from your writings I know you also want to be in control over the behaviour of other people
You're right but only partially.
To be precise, I'd say that I want other people to respect my time, my life and the work I've done.
At this very moment there only 2 ppl who actually wanted to help me make a great game and have some income *with me* not *apart from me*.
Besides, there's an easy way to get free from my control: ask me for a permission to use my game commercially.
If that's too much to ask of someone for getting a work of 2 years, then I guess we'll never come to grips with that person.
Welcome in the world of copyright!
Yay!!! I've just avoided so much troubles!
Seriously, I don't want to depend on some pal my entire MGC-developer-life just because he fixed something ages ago.
What should I do to get free of that hypothetical dependence?
Yep, re-write his code from scratch using my own brains.
I just don't want to go the long way and code things by myself.
Those who are truly interested are already showed their interest and are doing their best.
By the way, I am not here to argue against share-alike.
I really don't understand what this sentence is supposed to mean...
Share-alike is a good way to reserve some rights - just like CC site states it.
But basically, what SA does is helping to control other people behaviour :)
Well, thanks for not restricting freedom in a special case, I guess?
No need to be *that* skeptic, really.
The guys who coded that stuff are the only ones to decide what to do with their stuff.
It would be unfair to let everyone to do anything.
So, it's me returning a favor.
Basically, this clause is just an exception from the general restrictive terms.
Yes, but what is your interest? (I've asked this earlier already ;)
Do you want to use other guys code as you'd like to?
Do you want to make it GPL and enforce that license to everyone else?
There's no way to make an open-source product w/o restrictions or imposing a certain behaviour.
Of course you will change the mods in a way that they will work best with Magichet, for obvious reasons.
I don't think it is really likely that one could extract a single mod cleanly out of Magichet without further changes, I guess.
Moreover, the mods I coded are inseparable from each other.
But there's no need to separate anything...
The game works and can be monetized in many ways.
The day I've changed the license I got rid of impostors, shut down projects who treated me like a slave and acquired some money to be able to develop MGC further. Moreover, I became able to place some bounties (and I *did* place them) on MT engine issues.
I don't know who's left in disgrace here but some unfair contingent.
Also, this exception only applies to the original mod author.
Who else should have the right?
I can only repeat myself: The guys who coded that stuff are the only ones to decide what to do with their stuff.
Should PilzAdam or TenPlus1 or anyone else wanted to make my changes available to everyone - they would have done it.
It's not like I'm forcing them to decide.
It's more like I have a strong faith that those ppl are interested in the Minetest future and that they will be able to what should and what can be backported from MGC.
I can't see why everyone should profit, but , hey! Gamers have a game to play for free, authors have full control over modified code...
The rest aren't really my business.
Really, I don't know why should I care for ppl whose help goes not to the devs, but just for the sake of making the code more "free".
But "freedom" is an illusion - GPL enforces it's rules upon everyone who uses it. I won't abide only because someone wants me to. I feel uneasy and anything but free.
Things would be easier if the whole subgame would fall under non-restrictive (read: no NC, no usage restrictions) terms instead.
Again, "easier" as in "easier for whom precisely"?
For me? No.
For the guys whose code I'm using? Certainly no, they have everything I got from them plus some more.
For players all over the world? Hell, no - they can play the game and modify it as they'd like to.
For those who wants to make profit w/o asking any of the authors whether they would like to be used? Bingo!
And again, the whole case can be settled in minutes by *asking*.
I've undergone that and didn't comply about it.
That's not scary or humiliating at all.
Just ask. Like I and many other did.
It all depends on whether a person *really* wants to play and/or to use the game.
This is not really convincing. I am not caring about what the Magichet license may be in 2 years when the stars and your mood are right. I care about the license in the present.
So, are you only care about the license after all?
Why not to contribute something beforehand?
Help me, show your interest in the game I'm making and I'll turn my face towards you.
If you don't want to, you still may ask me to let you perform a certain commercial activity.
And this explains your reasons to use NC in … what way exactly? o_O
Did I say that explains anything? O_o
You've mentioned some hypothetical "potential contributors", I told you that I didn't see any.
Literally no one wants to contribute.
But there are plenty of those who are bitching about the fact the license won't let them
if they would ever wanted to.
Your motivation to choose NC is still unclear for me.
Do you want to talk about this?
It's all there in this very thread.
And no, I don't really want to talk about this.
Maybe I'm a total failure when it comes to explanations, but I doubt no one really gets why I've picked up NC license.
I want to be in control of where my stuff goes.
There's no need to pay me or anyone else. It's just that "please, bla-bla-bla" doesn't work.
Then you also know that CC-BY-NC is a toxic license (from the user perspective) at least in Germany, but for some reason still unknown to me, you still insist on it (or at least the idea of “non-commercial”)?
Once again: what "user"?
If you concerned about legal use in German, I'm open for making special terms for anyone who develops *and* uses MGC in Germany.
You seem to be pretty obsessed with that permission thing. ;-)
Not really. But repeating it helps me to defend my game against "give-me-this-and-go-fix-the-bugs-I-found-which-occured-only-because-I-have-a-different-view-on-a-game-you-are-coding-for-me" kind of people.
It is especially helpful against Russians, Ukrainians and Chinese :)
Well, the problem I have with that thinking is, the license is useless because it is so restrictive. Basically one can't do anything without your explicit permission.
You're wrong.
One
can!
And by doing so he/she will automatically share his/her improvements with any other person there is.
In fact, the terms for re-distributing additions are even less restrictive than LGPL 2.1.
If you'd like to *probably* do something later - think ahead and ask for everything you'll need and you may end up "needing".
Explicit permission required only when one would like to profit upon my work.
I don't want to make the license say that I myself will monitor who is "breaking the rules".
I had made a mistake of stating that once and it cost me around $150 and 2 weeks of constantly increasing stressful tension.
The license should be nice to me and to those regular users. All the others has been given "a way".
That defeats the point of having a license altogether and one must treat Magicet as if it were fully protected by copyright.
This is only true for organizations.
Organizations can be small and can be very big.
I'd better protect myself from those bigger ones - they surely have at least one lawyer and I don't want to give someone like MS the right to use my work w/o making me happy as well ;)
Notch & Jeb did abuse MC community several times: pistons, horses, hostile mobs etc. And there were only how much of Mojang? 7? 8? IDK, but they used other peoples work only to make profit for themselves.
As for little ones - those are quite easy to communicate with and I don't see how I can't let some group of people to use my game commercially.
And no, it is not “hard” to ask for permission. That's not the point.
Good :)
And now imagine your want to build a subgame out of a set of these mods.
That's not a "game".
It's a "compilation" of mods.
Which no one wants to fix, because modders has other things to do.
I don't support those who only puts mods together for the sake of doing a great minetest_game based compilation - I've seen enough clones with little to no difference.
But don't get me wrong, ^that^ is not the reason for NC.
The game should be unique. I don't want to have lots of minetest_game/MGC clones/forks (but there are!).
The efforts get spread instead of being combined.
As for MGC - MOST mods are incompatible with it. At least the ones which add any blocks or tools.
There're not enough people who want to help with MGC itself, let alone writing a mod for it :)
Do you want to make a MGC-based game?
If that's the case, then join my troops or code a mod for it if you don't want too.
Besides, I'm pretty open to new features.
But I need to know that when some shit will happen, I won't be the only one who cares.
It would be a nightmare to get all those permissions and would require countless exchanges, plus delays (some people might be on vacation or something).
I know precisely how do you feel!
It took me around a
month to gain Voltbuild under WTFPL terms.
That is why I've provided that much info on how to communicate with me: PM, e-mail, Github, GooglePlay, my own web page... I can't miss all of those - I'm not dead or anything. And even if those would fail, one should still be able to google for "4aiman" and learn as much as who I really am, my phone number, where do I work and where do I live. It's all there on the Internet - one only need to at least
make some effort.
But I knew it was
worth waiting.
I knew that in the case I won't get needed permissions I won't be able to redistribute within MGC it under NC license.
I knew that I'll be forced to code that stuff from scratch and that it would've thrown me months behind the schedule.
So I worked on re-coding the default and waited for lady luck.
In the case there weren't any WTFPL mods, then I'd have to code even more than I did.
I don't support those who are too proud to ask for a needed permission.
When it comes to licenses and code ppl tend to get carried away.
Say, what if I had *loads* of hoverboards...
made of LEGO-like parts...
with a linux-like OS...
that compiles itself upon boot from a sources...
supplied with the hoverboard...
and the only thing which was required to get as many as one would like to...
*for absolutely free*...
would have been making an unofficial request?
I'd say there would be a *loads* of requests.
Now, how many of those requests hadn't been made if there was a rule to NOT use those LEGO-hoverboards commercially as long as one didn't make another request?
I doubt that at least 10% of ppl would have gone indifferent to those hoverboards.
Magichet is a hoverboard in my eyes. It is unique, modular, features tons of unique elements, free, there's no need to "make mods work together", but a permission is needed to use commercially.
Luckily, most subgames and mods in these forums are released as free software under non-restrictive terms.
I don't really care about mods. I can't use those right away and I don't really want to.
I mean, look - there are plenty of great mods which are based upon minetest_game's mods.
More ~ores ~doors ~blocks ~mesecons ~whatever.
Back in the day I was mocked (in a really friendly way, so I didn't mind) by using over 70 tools to make enchantments possible.
But nowadays we have mesecons with lots of "wire_000000X", stairs with way more nodes than needed, doors mods which use the minetest_game/doors to register new doors with 3x more nodes than it is actually needed (w/o using meshnodes)...
And that would be enough for me, If those things "worked" like I wanted.
But, alas, no... those need to be fixed.
I'd better do things my way from the starts than lurk through the code I can't really read due to many reasons (one of them being the official "code style guide")
I really like MC eula terms, but those are even more restrictive
https://account.mojang.com/documents/minecraft_eula