Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Switch to zlib/CC BY-SA #13

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Switch to zlib/CC BY-SA #13

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

IBPX
Copy link
Contributor

@IBPX IBPX commented Sep 15, 2016

Fixes #11.

This switches the license to zlib, which is the original license (and you have to use, I believe, because the original Teeworlds uses it, and you cannot simply relicense their code), and the content license to Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike.

Each of the following with a checked box next to their name agrees to the relicense their code under the zlib license, and any content they've contributed as CC BY-SA 4.0.

(I haven't included @pelya, because it seems their only commit was removing something.)

Comment "I agree" if you agree, and once everyone has, this can be merged.

Fixes Siile#11.

This switches the license to zlib, which is the original license (and you have to use, I believe, because the original Teeworlds uses it, and you cannot simply relicense the code), and the content license to Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike.
@H-M-H
Copy link
Contributor

H-M-H commented Sep 15, 2016

@Siile feel free to license my contribution as however you see fit (and tbh, it is not really that much). So yes, I agree with this if Siile also does.

@Henningstone
Copy link
Contributor

I'm ok with this aswell; didn't do that much anyway...

@pelya
Copy link
Contributor

pelya commented Sep 15, 2016

Yes, you can change the license for the whole project from ZLIB to CC-BY-NC-SA, because you are not removing usage restrictions, you are adding new restrictions. ZLIB allows that, contrary to GPL, which prohibits changing the license to anything else.

The original code does not lose it's ZLIB license status, but since your modifications have more restrictive license, the whole project becomes licensed under this new, more restrictive license. The source files with no modifications retain their ZLIB license.

It is still not permitted to remove ZLIB license text from the license.txt file, you should add your own license text above it instead.

Also, CC-BY-NC-SA is not suited for a source code, and it is not an open-source license - an open-source license by definition must permit commercial use.

You can license your data files under CC-BY-NC-SA instead, but only new data files that you have created yourself.
The original data files from TeeWorlds will retain their CC-BY-SA status, because CC-BY-SA prohibits changing the license to anything else.

@IBPX
Copy link
Contributor Author

IBPX commented Sep 15, 2016

@pelya Okay, so it is allowed to use those licenses, my mistake. My original points (which Siile agreed to) in #11 still stand. Thanks for pointing that out.

@Siile
Copy link
Owner

Siile commented Sep 16, 2016

@IBPX Some of the assets in data folder are modified from paid assets, so I can't permit the commercial use of data folder without breaking the original licenses. Everything else sounds good.

@IBPX
Copy link
Contributor Author

IBPX commented Sep 16, 2016

@Siile If they are payed assets, I don't think you have the rights to even license them CC BY-SA-NC. What assets? Could you also link me to a store page for them?

I would love for this game to take off. This could be a very promising open source project, but I doubt it will get very much traction if it has license issues like this. At this point I don't think it could be considered "free software".

If you could list of all non-free assets, we could at least relicense all of the original stuff you've made as CC BY-SA, and work towards replacing the non-free assets in the future.

This game could be very popular in the Linux community if we fixed these issues.

@pelya
Copy link
Contributor

pelya commented Sep 16, 2016

If you have drawn something using that commercial skeletal-animation tool,
then all your drawings are still fully yours, you can license them as you
wish. Unless you used some graphics asset from that tool library, then you
need to read it's EULA for details.

On Sep 16, 2016 5:46 PM, "IBPX" notifications@github.com wrote:

@Siile https://github.com/Siile If they are payed assets, I don't think
you have the rights to even license them CC BY-SA-NC. What assets? Could
you also link me to a store page for them?

This is a very promising open source project, but I doubt it will get very
much traction if it has license issues like this.


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#13 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJewPn-p7v88ATGcoXfHNom6iEV4K06ks5qqqvggaJpZM4J-J9S
.

@IBPX
Copy link
Contributor Author

IBPX commented Sep 16, 2016

@pelya

Some of the assets in data folder are modified from paid assets

I think we should edit the license file to list the commercial art, and say "everything besides that is CC BY-SA", then work towards slowly replacing them.

@IBPX
Copy link
Contributor Author

IBPX commented Sep 19, 2016

@Siile: Can we make a list of non-free assets, then license everything except those?

IBPX added a commit to IBPX/Ninslash that referenced this pull request Oct 28, 2016
Compromise for issue Siile#13. Because some of the art is commercial, for now we may as well just relicense the _code,_ and figure out the art later on.

Everyone who has contributed code has already agreed to relicense their code from CC BY-NC-SA to `zlib` (see Siile#13).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants