3 ms·
I don't even know what point you're making. 'as long as you adhere to the rules.' Yes, by 'obtain a commercial license from Xamarin', they mean, 'pay a licens
by shadowmint 11y ago
I don't even know what point you're making.
'as long as you adhere to the rules.'
Yes, by 'obtain a commercial license from Xamarin', they mean, 'pay a license fee'.
Like say, if you ship a mobile game. The only reason Unity gets away with it is because they have a licensing deal that permits them to ship mono.
If you want to write a mobile game, you pay for it.
That's not freedom.
- tormeh 11y agoYeah, on a locked down mobile platform this is all true, but on the desktop the quote I pasted suggests you actually can use Mono for free. To most users of Unreal Engine, mobile games aren't really a priority, though I understand Unreal wants to change this. The problem in the mobile case is not that Mono isn't free; it's that the licence isn't permissive enough. That mobile platforms and GPL-style licenses don't play well together is nothing new, and I think it's misleading to call Mono "not free" just because the restriction of the Apple App Store and iOS don't allow you to use it there.
- carussell 11y ago> I don't even know what point you're making. Then read again. The fact is the runtime and libraries are MIT and LGPL. Your statement that your game has to be GPL if you use them is totally wrong. Least of all, because the GPL is neither of those two licenses, but most importantly, those licenses allow you to release a game under a license that's not even MIT or the LGPL, because that's the nature of those two licenses. Unity is required to pay a custom license because they didn't want to accept the terms that are available to everyone. (I almost wrote "everyone else" there, but that would have been wrong because the terms were available even to Unity.)
- carussell 11y agoYou mind explaining that downvote there, buddy?