GPL Policy

Discussion among members of the development team.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
User avatar
Tomsik
Posts: 1401
Joined: February 7th, 2005, 7:04 am
Location: Poland

Re: GPL Policy

Post by Tomsik » September 13th, 2008, 12:24 pm

West wrote:Which commercial distros distribute the game?
I don't really know, but wesnoth is a popular game, so I expect many to do that.

User avatar
zookeeper
WML Wizard
Posts: 9739
Joined: September 11th, 2004, 10:40 pm
Location: Finland

Re: GPL Policy

Post by zookeeper » September 13th, 2008, 12:36 pm

Well, they can always continue distributing Wesnoth, they just need to cut out the music (and maybe provide that separately). I would expect all major commercial distros to have some repository for stuff they can't include in the main distribution for these kind of reasons, but I wouldn't really know.

User avatar
ivanovic
Lord of Translations
Posts: 1146
Joined: September 28th, 2004, 10:10 pm
Location: Germany

Re: GPL Policy

Post by ivanovic » September 13th, 2008, 12:39 pm

West wrote:
Tomsik wrote:Choice of non-commercial license would make it impossible to distribute wesnoth in commercial distros.
Hmm. :|

Which commercial distros distribute the game?
Short guess: probably all... (since it is one of the "good and default" games)

That is: when does a distribuition start to be commercial? Is it already commercial when they charge a fee for shipping the disc to you instead of you download it yourself? Or is it only commercial when it is only available with a support bundle and such (like those red hat professional stuff)?

With other words: hard to judge, really hard to judge... What probably can be possible (I am not a lawyer and no expert in licensing) is a license of our own stating that commercial (or general?) use when not bundling with Wesnoth is forbidden (as in: "When you use Wesnoth, you are free to use this music but it is only allowed to be shipped with the game", the only question here would be: is it still allowed to listen to the music when not using Wesnoth, eg on a dedicated music system or when just surfing the web as background music?). Maybe esr can say something about those issues and his experiences with it.

Thumper
Posts: 93
Joined: March 9th, 2006, 9:00 pm
Location: Linlithgow, Scotland
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by Thumper » September 13th, 2008, 2:51 pm

Choosing a non-commercial license would be idiotic. For that matter, it boggles the mind that anyone would contribute to Wesnoth under the impression that despite all of the code and graphics being free to modify at will, that their own personal corner was sacrosanct. Even more so when that comes with a mindset that modifying said corner was a violation of some sort.

- Chris

User avatar
West
Retired Lord of Music
Posts: 1173
Joined: October 30th, 2006, 7:24 am
Location: In the philotic connections between ansibles.
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by West » September 13th, 2008, 3:06 pm

Thumper wrote:Choosing a non-commercial license would be idiotic.
So in your opinion, having no music at all -- because the composers won't accept a commercial license -- would be less idiotic?

Jozrael
Forum Regular
Posts: 1034
Joined: June 2nd, 2006, 1:39 pm
Location: NJ, USA.

Re: GPL Policy

Post by Jozrael » September 13th, 2008, 3:11 pm

Not gonna lie, I don't see why the music should be any different from the other forms of contributions to Wesnoth. Wesnoth has always been a 100% free game. I could be misinformed, but its kind of saddening to me to see that being...tarnished, in a way. Honestly, I'd be happier with no further additions to the musical score of Wesnoth rather than compromising its fundamental nature (at least in my opinion).

Rain
Music Contributor
Posts: 256
Joined: September 27th, 2005, 4:44 am

Re: GPL Policy

Post by Rain » September 13th, 2008, 3:23 pm

Jozrael wrote:Honestly, I'd be happier with no further additions to the musical score of Wesnoth rather than compromising its fundamental nature (at least in my opinion).
These aren't very promising comments to be hearing. :annoyed: The musicians spend a lot of time trying to make new music for the game. Are you essentially saying that our job is done? If so, I would disagree.
Wesnoth has always been a 100% free game. I could be misinformed, but its kind of saddening to me to see that being...tarnished, in a way.
There is nothing being tarnished. GPL basically states that the composer has little rights to what happens to their music. I've always understood this. However, there is nothing wrong with a composer, who invests countless hours making and perfecting each and every pice, wondering what is happening to their music when they aren't looking. When that is taken out of their hands, it causes reason for alarm.
That someone else can take the music and claim it as their own without anyone knowing is my biggest fear. That all the countless hours I put into making music will be for naught, because some cretin is going to "steal it" and pass it off as their own.

On the flipside, there is always the idea that people will take the piece, use it in their own project and the composer will receive credit both here AND there. I wonder how often this happens though.
In short, it's okay that my music is being used for Wesnoth under GPL as I've always understood the risks. I can only trust people not to be dishonest and focus on what I do- making music.

Replying to Jozrael's first comment... In short, if people don't want more music for Wesnoth, please let your feelings be known on this issue. I would hate to think that the musicians time is being wasted when no one really cares about new music being added. However, for right now, I am going to assume that Jozrael is on his own here. :D

User avatar
West
Retired Lord of Music
Posts: 1173
Joined: October 30th, 2006, 7:24 am
Location: In the philotic connections between ansibles.
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by West » September 13th, 2008, 3:28 pm

As mentioned I don't have a problem with my music being modified (i.e. the mixed down, finished pieces). Neither do I have a problem with using a commercial license. But that's just me, I can't speak for any of the other composers. What I do have a problem with, as I've already said, is handing out "source" files, but that isn't really an issue ATM.

What everyone needs to understand is that musicians are a very territorial breed. From day one we're told to protect our music at all costs, not to mention that most of us get very, very attached to our music. I'm not saying this should be an excuse for making exceptions and somehow tarnishing the spirit of the game, all I'm saying that it's going to be really hard finding musicians who are willing to work under those conditions. When adding the factor that we need musicians who do orchestral music, the odds of ever finding new contributors start looking kind of bleak.

As for me, I can't choose a side in this matter. I'm a musician, but I've also been involved with other OSS project and I'm really a huge follower of the whole free software movement and philosophy.

User avatar
West
Retired Lord of Music
Posts: 1173
Joined: October 30th, 2006, 7:24 am
Location: In the philotic connections between ansibles.
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by West » September 13th, 2008, 3:31 pm

Rain wrote:Replying to Jozrael's first comment... In short, if people don't want more music for Wesnoth, please let your feelings be known on this issue. I would hate to think that the musicians time is being wasted when no one really cares about new music being added. However, for right now, I am going to assume that Jozrael is on his own here. :D
Yeah I agree, please let us know.

If Jozrael's opinion can be considered the majority view, I see no point in writing any more music for the game.

User avatar
doofus-01
Art Contributor
Posts: 3672
Joined: January 6th, 2008, 9:27 pm
Location: USA, the civilized part.

Re: GPL Policy

Post by doofus-01 » September 13th, 2008, 3:33 pm

I can say that I would be disappointed if all music development ceased. There is some great work going on here, and hopefully more to come. I understand there are legal issues, and don't have any answers for that.

I certainly understand the musicians not wanting to provide the work files that they used to make the .ogg, at least until the source coders submit to keylogging (and who would put up with that). The comparison of the .ogg to an binary/executable doesn't seem quite right.
-----------------------
EDIT: This link makes it sound like releasing a drawing is fine by itself, (no need to for .svg or layered file): http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLHardware

So, a drawing of a wizard is a plan for a wizard. An .ogg file of battle music is a plan for battle music. If someone wants to make something off of those plans, fine. But the artist is not required to give something more convenient as "source code".

At least I think that would make sense if it were true...
Last edited by doofus-01 on September 13th, 2008, 5:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aleksi
Music Contributor
Posts: 534
Joined: November 12th, 2003, 9:00 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by Aleksi » September 13th, 2008, 3:39 pm

West wrote:What everyone needs to understand is that musicians are a very territorial breed. From day one we're told to protect our music at all costs, not to mention that most of us get very, very attached to our music. I'm not saying this should be an excuse for making exceptions and somehow tarnishing the spirit of the game, all I'm saying that it's going to be really hard finding musicians who are willing to work under those conditions. When adding the factor that we need musicians who do orchestral music, the odds of ever finding new contributors start looking kind of bleak.
Bingo! :eng:

But, i must say, like Timothy, it is also my mistake not taking the GPL more seriously. When i first joined Wesnoth it was because it was a free game and i had the opportunity to compose music for it. After a lonnnng time i understood what GPL was... and its consequences... Know i don't really know how to position myself.

Hard choice.

User avatar
anakayub
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 518
Joined: May 3rd, 2007, 12:44 pm
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by anakayub » September 13th, 2008, 3:41 pm

I'm not an expert in licensing, but I feel compelled to chime in again:

I believe that licensing is meant as a means to an end, for which most of the time is assuring quality and recognition, with some variations to allow for additional features, e.g. continual improvement if source files are provided to allow modification.

There's no need for strict "you have to use GPL because everything else is in GPL" in my opinion as long as other options are available/feasible. The best option is to use what's appropriate for the particular component.

It saddens me to see some of the musicians riled up. Moderator note for one more time: Please limit the discussion to the musicians and those who can provide good discussion material.


/anakayub-modmode
Take a breath.

Thumper
Posts: 93
Joined: March 9th, 2006, 9:00 pm
Location: Linlithgow, Scotland
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by Thumper » September 13th, 2008, 4:13 pm

West wrote:
Thumper wrote:Choosing a non-commercial license would be idiotic.
So in your opinion, having no music at all -- because the composers won't accept a commercial license -- would be less idiotic?
Vastly so, because it doesn't restrict my freedoms. Wesnoth has proven that one of the previous "truisms" of free software video games - that you can't get good graphics under the GPL - isn't true. It would be folly to give up on trying to get the same change in attitude from musical artists.

We don't allow non-free artwork into the game just because art hasn't been submitted for a particular portrait yet. Music should be the same.

- Chris

User avatar
Tomsik
Posts: 1401
Joined: February 7th, 2005, 7:04 am
Location: Poland

Re: GPL Policy

Post by Tomsik » September 13th, 2008, 4:24 pm

Rain wrote:However, there is nothing wrong with a composer, who invests countless hours making and perfecting each and every pice, wondering what is happening to their music when they aren't looking.
Coders and portrait-makers and such invest countless hours as well, yet they don't have anything againt GPL.

TimothyP
Music Contributor
Posts: 244
Joined: July 18th, 2005, 4:34 pm
Location: Southern California
Contact:

Re: GPL Policy

Post by TimothyP » September 13th, 2008, 4:33 pm

Since it came up, my best guess at "source" for music would be the project file for whatever program you use. This could then be opened by the end user in their own version of the software (Digital Performer, Cubase, Logic, etc) and they could apply their own samples to it.

For some reason, I can't see how software code and art is the same. As an analogy, I envision someone submitting a story to the internet under GPL. This would mean anyone could change the story however they want to. There's just something different about that as compared to a piece of software that serves a practical function.

When the GPL license was created, did it have art and every form of created content in mind?

Just like the rest of you, I've been a fan of open source software for a long time. I just never would have thought artworks of various kinds were considered source code.

Post Reply