Elvas Tower: OR Goes Open Source - Elvas Tower

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

OR Goes Open Source We are adopting the GNU GPL V3 license. Rate Topic: -----

#11 User is offline   cjakeman 

  • Vice President
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: ET Admin
  • Posts: 2,857
  • Joined: 03-May 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peterborough, UK
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 14 May 2013 - 06:08 AM

 Csantucci, on 14 May 2013 - 01:47 AM, said:

I can make publicly available for free on a website a modified release of OR

You can charge a fee if you wish. What you cannot do is add restrictions to the license, thus taking freedoms away from your users.

#12 User is offline   roeter 

  • Vice President
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 2,420
  • Joined: 25-October 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 14 May 2013 - 07:00 AM

 Csantucci, on 14 May 2013 - 06:03 AM, said:

do I have to provide only the source files that are modified and a link to the actual OR website where all other source files are present, or do I have also to provide the source files that have remained unaltered?

That depends on whether you present your version as a full package, or as an update only.
If you present it as a full package and offer all source-files, then, apart from having to add your own new or altered source-files, you must also clearly indicate the extend of your change(s) and which source files you have altered or added.
For any files you have changed you may not delete or change the copyright statement and original developer information (if provided), but you must add your information to the existing info.

Regards,

Rob Roeterdink

#13 User is online   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 14 May 2013 - 11:21 AM

Thanks to all. Are the actual copyright sentences within the .cs files coherent with the GNU license?

#14 User is offline   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,488
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 14 May 2013 - 11:57 AM

 Csantucci, on 14 May 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

Thanks to all. Are the actual copyright sentences within the .cs files coherent with the GNU license?


Not yet, but I'll be updating them all very soon.

#15 User is offline   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,488
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 15 May 2013 - 02:15 PM

All the code in Source has had the headers updated (added in some cases!) to reflect to new GNU GPL v3 license of Open Rails.

#16 User is offline   Coonskin 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 3,691
  • Joined: 15-January 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern Oklahoma
  • Country:

Posted 15 May 2013 - 03:39 PM

Can someone please break this down for those of us (me) that are challenged in the "legalise" department?

How will this affect me as a commercial and/or freeware CONTENT (not a source code) developer?

I need to know so I can make an informed opinion/decision.

Thanks.

#17 User is offline   Genma Saotome 

  • Owner Emeritus and Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: ET Admin
  • Posts: 15,308
  • Joined: 11-January 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 15 May 2013 - 09:51 PM

Andre, it only applies to the OR source code, not any game content.

As always, each content creator has to decide for himself what the terms are for what you've created. IMO, something to consider these days is to take note of how many creators have moved on to other things, including taking that peculiar one way ticket on the tombstone route. With sites falling left and right perhaps it's starting to make more sense to be publishing source files too.

The laymans explanation of the legalese is your creative work is copyright protected, just as before, but you've opened loopholes to let people use your source material under very specific conditions which, AFAIK includes two important criteria: (1) They MUST credit you for what you've done and (2) the MUST publish their changes using the exact same license as you used. It becomes share... and share alike.

I think it puts the kabosh on payware and so I understand why that line of products may choose to not use Open Source licensing but for freeware I'm coming around to the point of view that it makes a certain amount of good sense.

#18 User is offline   Coonskin 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 3,691
  • Joined: 15-January 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern Oklahoma
  • Country:

Posted 16 May 2013 - 05:48 AM

Thank you Dave.

#19 User is online   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 16 May 2013 - 07:17 AM

If I would like to make available a modified version of Open Rails, may I still name it Open Rails? Do I have to completely change such name? May I name it e.g. Open Rails-ITA?
What about the logo? May I still use the OR logo for such modified version? Do I have to make a completely different logo? May I develop a similar, but not equal logo?

#20 User is offline   cjakeman 

  • Vice President
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: ET Admin
  • Posts: 2,857
  • Joined: 03-May 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peterborough, UK
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 16 May 2013 - 10:38 AM

Hi Carlo,

Just 5 days since the GPL announcement and already you're discussing a project "fork" !

 Csantucci, on 16 May 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

If I would like to make available a modified version of Open Rails, may I still name it Open Rails? Do I have to completely change such name? May I name it e.g. Open Rails-ITA?

You can't call it Open Rails, because that would be confusing. You are advised to add your own name such as Open Rails Santucci.

The license requires you (in section 5) to ensure:

a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.

I guess the logo needs the same treatment as the name. Best if you create one that shows your work is based on Open Rails but is different from Open Rails.

You might also consider ways to avoid publishing a modified version as keeping up with our improvements will involve you in quite a bit of work.

Hope that helps,

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users