[gameprogrammer] Re: Welcome new members!
- From: David Olofson <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:42:00 +0100
On Sunday 12 December 2010, at 23.19.29, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
[...]
> We had need of doing http requests recently so went to legal to ask if
> we could use libcurl and they said yes. They are fine with the MIT
> license as it turns out but want nothing to do with GPL style licenses
> for some reason.
I can certainly see why GNU GPL would be an issue (it basically doesn't mix
with closed source code, at all) - but the LGPL should be fine in most
cases... Of course, if you really need to linx statically, that's a (minor)
issue, but that can be dealt with.
Could it be that you have to release any modifications you make to the LGPL
code? Could be an issue if you intend to invest a lot of resources into
subverting some code into something else, but in that case, maybe you're not
using the right tool for the job, or you're actually better off rolling your
own...?
Anyway, my point is, there ARE reasons why LGPL code may not be appropriate
for a proprietary project, but those never seem to be what scares people away.
There is just too much FUD around it all, I think.
> This has been an issue in the past for other game companies i worked for
> too.
>
> At one place, when the producer found out i used open sourced software
> (even though it had been OKd by the tech director) he told me if i did
> that again in the future i would be fired.
It would have been rather interesting to know the motivation behind that
position...!
Of course, some kinds of software just doesn't lend itself very well to
Free/Open Source development (a certain critical mass of serious
users/contributers is required), and there, proprietary alternatives tend to
be superior - but when a Free/Open Source alternative is superior, or even
just gets the job done, it seems stupid to avoid using it.
What is it that makes people feel good about paying a premium for limited
rights to use products that they cannot control, and that are bound to be
abandoned and left to die sooner or later?
Maybe the same thing that makes many gamers ignore any games for less than
$19.95...? "Anything available free of charge has to be crap, and/or there are
strings attached."
> I think ignorance may at least be part to blame, ignorance and legal
> paranoia IMO but of course it's easy for me to throw stones without
> having the threat of being sued (real or imagined) on MY head hehe.
>
> kinda crazy though isnt it?
Thinking about it that way, I just don't understand how someone worried about
using Free/Open Source software dares to go anywhere near anything that comes
with a typical proprietary software EULA...! Not only do those EULAs appear
generally offensive and threatening in tone, but behind them are massive
corporations with full time lawyers.
But people are more worried about the GNU licenses...? :-D
--
//David Olofson - Consultant, Developer, Artist, Open Source Advocate
.--- Games, examples, libraries, scripting, sound, music, graphics ---.
| http://consulting.olofson.net http://olofsonarcade.com |
'---------------------------------------------------------------------'
Other related posts:
