4 ms·
From what I understand, if a game engine's source code is GPL, there is no legal way to require derived games release their assets under a CC license. Does this
by hgs3 3y ago
From what I understand, if a game engine's source code is GPL, there is no legal way to require derived games release their assets under a CC license. Does this mean we need a "super license" that incorporates the terms of both GPL (for the code) and CC-BY-SA (for the assets)?
- whateveracct 3y agoWhy should derivative works have to release assets under CC? What's the goal? Is it so bad if people still have artistic IP but the underlying code is Free?
- hgs3 3y agoGames are a combination of art and code. Why should programmers be the only one's required to release their work under a viral license? Artist should as well.
- whateveracct 3y agoI mean I do think it's fine if you wish to try to take this route. Nothing morally wrong or anything. But I think the art itself isn't just like code. It's not just the bits used to make images on screen. There are characters, stories, ideas, and worlds being created derived from the artist's personal life and philosophy. That's the actual appeal, and there are more downsides to making your IP open like this than there are downsides to FOSSing your game code.
- hgs3 3y agoI hear what you're saying, but I don't think game code - which is responsible for the mechanics and "feel" of a game - is merely "bits used to make images on screen." To me game code is as unique as the artwork. However, the purpose of the engine code is as you describe so maybe it could be FOSS? Maybe LGPL?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- un_ess 3y agoSame logic as with Machine Learning model: the code can be GPL, the weights can be with any other license. (cf LLaMa)
- engeljohnb 3y agoWhy not release the assets under the GPL? https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOtherThanSoftware https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOtherThanSoftwa...