On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 07:22:55PM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 06:29:21PM -0800, Seth Galbraith wrote:
> > > Actually I am worried about that. I'm going to suggest the OQ people
> > > seriously consider the LGPL or other license for the project because
> > > there are mods which are not GPL'd and making them work with OQ should
> > > not make them suddenly Copyright violations.
> > Oh gosh no. Using LGPL in OQ would create a number of new problems
> > without really solving any of the existing ones. Also, I don't think the
> > copyright on the OQ pak file affects a mod that just says something like
> > "precache_model("foo/bar.mdl")"
> Compiling a .map into a .bsp uses textures. These textures could not be
> OQ unless you were willing to release the source to the map.
Personally, I think that's good. But I'm, as previously noted, a free
> This is a problem that ONLY happens with the GPL. And the LGPL does not
> have that problem. I'd like to know what other problems it does create
Well, the LGPL creates special cases for 'linking', which is analogous
to, but not exactly, what we have here.
We could simply use GPL + exception if you liked.
> > (BTW - I think the source of Quake Maps and MDLs could have the GPL
> > applied to them. Especially if the MDL frames are in one of the several
> > popular text formats. However bitmaps should not be compiled from text
> > source :-)
> You have never used xpm files have you? Those are literally C source
> code for a pixmap. ("bitmap" is a misnomer, though a popular one)
Hmm. This is an irrelevant detail, though. Copyright holds on the
'thing' that original, artistic work was put into. In the case of
programs, this is the C source. In the case of xpms, you presumably
didn't edit the C source directly, so the copyright is on the visual
(not a lawyer, etc..)
Jules Bean | Any sufficiently advanced
jules@...} | technology is indistinguishable
jmlb2@... | from a perl script