How do you think about "Forbidden license" paragraph?

[KGM]

NOTE: I edited the poll since wuzzy wrote : By the way, the poll is completely useless. :D
If you want to say “Yes, more restrictive”, that's not a possible answer. Or “Yes, do something else”". appaerently, this deleted all votes cast before, so you'll have to vote again. :( (in the last poll, 19 voted no, 1 voted yes, remove completely, one voted, yes, but still disallow ... ; information without guarantee!)

"Disallowed licenses

Any game or content included therein that disallows derivatives cannot be published on this forum. These include CC NoDerivs and pretty much any closed source licenses."
(taken out guidelines in Subgame Releases)

"Disallowed licenses

Any mod or content included therein that disallows derivatives cannot be published on this forum. These include CC NoDerivs and pretty much any closed source licenses."
(taken out guidelines in Mod Releases)

AspireMint also wants to know:
Is NC allowed for models or which license do you recommend for models?

What that means:

If someone makes a game/mod under such a license, he can't publish it properly, so that means less mods/subgames on forums for the end users.

Why such a license:

Cause you don't want anyone to steal your code, publish it, slightly changed, and take all the credits.
(If you think that won't happen anyway, look how many minetest forks, among them some sold for money, exist. (ask wuzzy, he knows!) )

Yes, This paragraph only affecs Mod Releases and Game Releases forums,
but anyway, I don't think a subgame is "wip" because it has a license you don't like, I think wip should refer to the content.
Also, Mod releases and Subgame releases are the mian places to search for a mod or subgame!
no one will find your stuff in the wip sections. (yes, that's a bit exaggerated, but anway, far less people will find it.)

Has anyone around here be stopped from modding only because of the forum rules?
yes, for example, ME.
my subgames post (LOTH) in game releases was deleted due to such "issues", and I won't post the new version I am developing right now there, neither I will post it in wip subgames, since there it won't be seen enough.

Most minetest modders prefer free licenses, but I don't know how some minetest modders developing closed source things would threaten the open source movement anyway!
I think that these two worlds can peacefully exist beside each other!

And even if a huge unfree software movement would threaten the free software movement, it's very unrealistic that a huge unfree software movement could form on this forum because most members simply have a different orientation.

And programs that are under a no-deriv license are always better than no programs at all!

Also, it's not impossible to legally fork a no-deriv software, you just have to convince the copyright owner to allow you doing so!

Your enemies are not the ones using no-deriv licenses, but the ones who copy your stuff, change it a bit, and then sell it for money!
(see minetest clones)

look at this!


__________________________________________your mental attitude^________________mine^

that's not two poles! actually, both mental attitudes are NEXT to each other!

You know, at first, I also developed under gpl, but then I realized that it doesn't protect your work from being missused, since everybody knows what missuse means, but no one can define it. => you can't disallow it if you can not define it!

So I simply choose a license that allows me to classify if something is missuse or not!

Just think about the theoretically possibility of a minetest clone getting more popular than the original minetest, being sold for money and being unfree software!

No-deriv allows you to stop perfectly legal missuse!
it's not the enemy, It's the rescue!

Furthermore, a copyleft license would not solve all problems, concider this one:
How about someone forking my work, changing it a little, taking the same license, mentioning me in a readme at the end. thaking all the credits :-( (*w*) >:{ ) #*!@!.

I definitely dont want to send a cease and desist to anyone who violates my license! (and I think that most of the other developers using closed source licenses won't do either :-))
but I want the opportunity tho defend my work against >:-) bad guys using such remedys.

Finally:

Why not just forbiding selling things on forums for money?

If you think this should change into one direction or another,
participate in the vote.

Hope that in future, when there are enough votes, some Moderator looks at vote and changes it, or doesn't, depending on what the majority wants.

[paramat]

This is not a democracy, luckily, the majority may vote for something that is wrong. Polls are unrepresentative anyway.

[duane]

Cause you don't want anyone to steal your code, publish it, slightly changed, and take all the credits.
(If you think that won't happen anyway, look how many minetest forks, among them some sold for money, exist. (ask wuzzy, he knows!) )

Firstly, if this is what you're worried about, you're doing it for the wrong reasons.

Second, it would be illegal under the gpl or mit licenses to redistribute without crediting the original author. That might not stop someone, but neither would a more restrictive license.

[KGM]

Second, it would be illegal under the gpl or mit licenses to redistribute without crediting the original author. That might not stop someone, but neither would a more restrictive license.

Ever heard of doual licensing?

taken part is gpl, other part is propietary.

if you license your new project this way, no one can fork it because a part of it is under a propietary license.

so you can basically do everything you could if all was under a propietary license (for example selling) since the weak open source license does'nt hinder you.

a no deriv license hinders guys who use such models much more efficiently.

and if someone with good thoughts in mind wants to fork your project he can simply ask you.

[Hume2]

I think, the restriction is good in case someone makes a perspective mod and then he leaves forever. I think that the community should be generous in this way and allow derivatives automatically.

Noone forces you to be generous, it's your freedom. You can still publish your mods elsewhere.

[AspireMint]

I would like to know some information about mob (mesh/model/...) license.
This -> viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1271 is not very useful in this case.
I know there is small chance someone will rework your model (not texture, i mean model/mesh and its animations),
but what about selling it? So my question is, is NC allowed for models or which license do you recommend for models? Im fine with code and textures.
I really hope this will be finally appended to (see above) thread.

[Wuzzy]

UPDATE: The following paragraph is WRONG!

This paragraph only affecs Mod Releases and Game Releases forums. Note the WIP sections are open to everything, even the most user-hostile licenses and fully copyrighted works are permitted there. So if you think this rule is a form of censorship, that's simply not true.

UPDATE: The previous paragaph is WRONG! Please ignore it. Reason:

Hi, posting things with forbidden licenses in WIP sections will result in their removal

Still, there is a reason why some restrictive licenses are rejected on Mod/Game Releases. Minetest is free software and I think it's safe to say our community is totally part of the Free Software movement. We value freedom and do not really like to support people who insist on restrictive terms and conditions.
Our active modding community was possible precisely because it has happened in most part on free software principles, which totally includes not denying you essential freedoms such as free sharing and creating derivate works, all basic things which are forbidden by default under copyright laws around the world.
If everyone would have insisted on their copyright (which everyone could!), Minetest would have been a very different (and sadder) landscape.

If someone makes a game/mod under such a license, he can't publish it properly, so that means less mods/subgames on forums for the end users.

There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. Has anyone around here be stopped from modding only because of the forum rules?
I have not the impression that there is a huge demand from modders to insist on their full copyright, i.e. denying others basic freedoms such as free sharing and making derivates. I find it also harmful to suggest that it is actually a good thing to actively endorse or support such tendencies or to suggest that insisting on your full copyright is a perfectly (morally) acceptable choice. This is simply the polar opposite of what we stand for.

Again, the reason why the Minetest community works quite well is because we have not been attacking each other because someone's copyright has been violated as if the devil has just ripped out your soul. Chillax! :-)

I would prefer if licenses that violate freedom 0 (the freedom to use the work for anything you want, including making money) would be ruled out as well, effectively making the Releases sections a 100% free software only zone. I believe freedom 0 is essential. Currently, licenses that deny you freedom 0 are permitted even in Mod/Game Releases.

But it's just the forum, so I am not feeling THAT strongly about it. Especially since Mod/Game Releases is de facto 99% free software anyway. Thankfully, people in our community rarely chose a license that violate the essential freedom 0. Modders which do release a mod under such a license are generally frowned upon anyway.

What is much more important to me right now are the rules for the upcoming Content DB because it will constitute a part of Minetest itself. Please read more here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=20193

Cause you don't want anyone to steal your code, publish it, slightly changed, and take all the credits.
(If you think that won't happen anyway, look how many minetest forks, among them some sold for money, exist. (ask wuzzy, he knows!) )

Then just pick a copyleft license and a license that requires crediting. It forbids all the nasty things you are scared of without denying any of the 4 freedoms of free software. Win-win, right? :-)
You do not have to fall back to full copyright and deny all of the freedoms, that's a common misconception.

Note that many (not all!) of the fishy Android ports are actually illegal because they fail the even most basic requirements, like the EASY requirement to credit the authors or to share the code. For some reason, the core devs never made a SERIOUS concentrated effort to combat this problem so far. It seems these forks have merely been tolerated (so far), but that doesn't mean they are OK from a legal standpoint.
But keep in mind, even if people start to do something about this, the goal here is NOT to fight and eliminate the forks as such, but merely to cure the violations.

Why not just forbiding selling things on forums for money?

Because that would be completely missing the point. Free software is never about money.
Selling things is not forbidden here, but good luck finding any buyers. :D

---

By the way, the poll is completely useless. :D
If you want to say “Yes, more restrictive”, that's not a possible answer. Or “Yes, do something else”.

[paramat]

In another topic KGM wrote:
> the topic was locked before the poll could reach enough votes to stand representative for the opinion of all forum users.

A poll will never be representative of all MT users, or even all forum users, as most can't be bothered to vote in polls. We have 11960 forum members, i've never seen that many vote in a poll. It's also not possible to consider those who did vote to be a reliable representation of MT users or forum members.

If theoretically all MT users did vote on something, it would be wrong for that to decide something, as the majority may be wrong. The experts should decide, while taking into account the opinion of MT users. As i often say, we are a 'benign dictatorship' not a democracy :)

[KGM]

@paramat : anyway, 16 votes was faaaar to few!

If theoretically all MT users did vote on something, it would be wrong for that to decide something, as the majority may be wrong. The experts should decide, while taking into account the opinion of MT users. As i often say, we are a 'benign dictatorship' not a democracy :)

I did not say that a vote should decide, it is just a help, since the "dictators" may be wrong too, and the vote may show them that they are wrong.


@wuzzy :
Thanks! I didn't notice that wip subgames and mods don't have such restrictions!

This paragraph only affecs Mod Releases and Game Releases forums. Note the WIP sections are open to everything, even the most user-hostile licenses and fully copyrighted works are permitted there. So if you think this rule is a form of censorship, that's simply not true.

anyway, I don't think a subgame is "wip" because it has a license you don't like, I think wip should refer to the content.

also, Mod releases and Subgame releases are the mian places to search for a mod or subgame!
no one will find your stuff in the wip sections. (yes, that's a bit exaggerated, but anway, far less people will find it.)

There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. Has anyone around here be stopped from modding only because of the forum rules?
I have not the impression that there is a huge demand from modders to insist on their full copyright, i.e. denying others basic freedoms such as free sharing and making derivates. I find it also harmful to suggest that it is actually a good thing to actively endorse or support such tendencies or to suggest that insisting on your full copyright is a perfectly (morally) acceptable choice. This is simply the polar opposite of what we stand for.

Has anyone around here be stopped from modding only because of the forum rules?

- ME ME ME!
my subgames post in game releases was deleted due to such "issues", and I won't post the new version I am developing right now there, neither I will post it in wip subgames, since there it won't be seen enough.

This is simply the polar opposite of what we stand for.

That might be true, but I think that this two poles can work together perfectly!

Also, it's not impossible to legally fork a no-deriv software, you just have to convince the copyright owner to allow you doing so!

Your enemies are not the ones using no-deriv licenses, but the ones who copy your stuff, change it a bit, and then sell it for money!
(see minetest clones)

You know, at first, I also developed under gpl, but then I realized that it doesn't protect your work from being missused, since everybody knows what missuse means, but no one can define it. => you can't disallow it if you can not define it!

So I simply choose a license that allows me to classify if something is missuse or not!

Still, there is a reason why some restrictive licenses are rejected on Mod/Game Releases. Minetest is free software and I think it's safe to say our community is totally part of the Free Software movement. We value freedom and do not really like to support people who insist on restrictive terms and conditions.

Your movement may be consumed by anyone at anytime!

Just think about the theoretically possibility of a minetest clone getting more popular than the original minetest, being sold for money and being unfree software!

No-deriv allows you to stop perfectly legal missuse!
it's not the enemy, It's the rescue!

Then just pick a copyleft license and a license that requires crediting. It forbids all the nasty things you are scared of without denying any of the 4 freedoms of free software. Win-win, right? :-)

Not all!
How about someone forking my work, changing it a little, taking the same license, mentioning me in a readme at the end. thaking all the credits :-( (*w*) >:{ ) #*!@!.

But keep in mind, even if people start to do something about this, the goal here is NOT to fight and eliminate the forks as such, but merely to cure the violations.

Because that would be completely missing the point. Free software is never about money.
Selling things is not forbidden here, but good luck finding any buyers. :D

And If they thake little addicted kid's pocket money using their forks? Thats far more worse than disallowing derivates as it deals true damage!

But it's just the forum, so I am not feeling THAT strongly about it. Especially since Mod/Game Releases is de facto 99% free software anyway. Thankfully, people in our community rarely chose a license that violate the essential freedom 0. Modders which do release a mod under such a license are generally frowned upon anyway.

then why not allow it? as you say, 99% of the software posted in Mod/Game Releases would stay free anyway!
do you really need that 1% ? :3
(on the other hand, some few persons would be really happy about such a change!)

Our active modding community was possible precisely because it has happened in most part on free software principles, which totally includes not denying you essential freedoms such as free sharing and creating derivate works, all basic things which are forbidden by default under copyright laws around the world.
If everyone would have insisted on their copyright (which everyone could!), Minetest would have been a very different (and sadder) landscape.

As you mention your post, the 1% non free licensed works wouldn't change much :3
Your community has grown, and most members prefer free licenses, thus the few guys who prefer no derivative licenses wont "poison" it at all.

Again, the reason why the Minetest community works quite well is because we have not been attacking each other because someone's copyright has been violated as if the devil has just ripped out your soul. Chillax! :-)

I definitely dont want to send a cease and desist to anyone who violates my license!
but I want the opportunity tho defend my work against >: ) bad guys using such remedys.

[Linuxdirk]

my subgames post in game releases was deleted due to such "issues", and I won't post the new version I am developing right now there, neither I will post it in wip subgames, since there it won't be seen enough.

Do whatever you want. It is a free world. But when you want to publish here you simply have to adhere to the rules for posing here.

Just think about the theoretically possibility of a minetest clone getting more popular than the original minetest, being sold for money!

Please re-read the LGPL.

Your community has grown, and most members prefer free licenses, thus the few guys who prefer no derivative licenses wont "poison" it at all.

It is absolutely fine to release a mod or game under a non-free license. It is just that those aren't allowed here. So deal with it and publish your stuff on your own website or so.

[KGM]

Why not change the rules?

[Linuxdirk]

Why not change the rules?

There is no justification for doing so.

[KGM]

There is no reason for keeping this rule.
And the justification for removing it therefore simply looks like this:
Hence the rule is a limitation without any justification, it should be removed!

[Linuxdirk]

There is no reason for keeping this rule.

Except the multiple reasons that were told to you by various people multiple times.

[KGM]

none of them is a real issue, see my arguments!

[Linuxdirk]

none of them is a real issue, see my arguments!

None of them are real arguments.

[KGM]

And why? One can always say that the opposites arguments are not real! please be more precise!

[Hume2]

Be calm. I think that everyone here have better things to do than improving other people's mods.

[Linuxdirk]

please be more precise!

Did you even try to read the answers that were given to you multiple times already in your threads?

This aside: If you want to use a non-free license for your stuff, no-one will stop you doing so. You're simply not allowed to "advertise" or host them on the forums.

[twoelk]

How do you think about "Forbidden license" paragraph?

it is not restrictive enough!!
nc licenses should also be at least sternly discouraged.

maybe a we need a sticky place with more extensive arguments that explain the reasons though.

Why not change the rules?

because it would harm Minetest to function as most, including you, wish it to.
(indeed, people have left or even rage quited mt because they felt that people "stole" their code and got the praise instead of the original coder; but minetest should be greater than any single coder.)

Also, it's not impossible to legally fork a no-deriv software, you just have to convince the copyright owner to allow you doing so!

sigh...
I miss RBA, would be nice to ask him to work on some eye candy again.
... but you declare it easy to go and ask people that provided code,
so I might as well challenge you to ask RBA to fix stuff in the technic game or all the other stuff he contributed.
Lucky for us we don't need to ask him of course,
because of the generouse license he normally contributed under.

Reality is people do fall of the edge of the project-world and sometimes they even die in real life. Look for example at the list of "previous core and other developers" in the Minetest credits tab. quite a few people there that might be a little more difficult to contact. Some moved on to other projects, some moved on in life, some were pupils living with their parents when the contributed to minetest and have since grown up, gone to university, founded a life of their own or whatever.

Only few things with Minetest are coded by a single person all by himself. Contacting every single contributer to games or modpacks or even some mods may prove quite difficult indeed.

A nice feature in the minetest culture at the moment is that I do not need to reinvent every single wheel I need for a mod project. I can easily reuse stuff others have developed before me. This way progress is a lot faster. Do you reall insist on everybody to have to slash his own way through the code jungle? Should all solutions only be used once and then blocked for any but those that have enough passion to hunt down the original coders? Do your contributions really contain all relevant information to not only make this a possible but also a task of reasonable effort let's say in 10 years from now? You might have moved to mars by then and not told anybody :-D

The good thing about the old WTFPL license was not it's language but rather it's ease of use for the community. You simply did not need to care about any legal things reusing stuff under this license ... or so was for a long time the allusion.

BTW, for those that might be wondering what all this is about, the discussed forum rules may be found here.

[KGM]

I see your point, free licenses are handy,
but I think forbiding any other licenses is simply the wrong way.
If someone uses closed source licenses even dough you promote free licenses, forbiding him posting his work under such a license may not change his mind either.
The only consequence may be that he posts his work somewhere else where the end user won't find it that easily.

[Hume2]

I see your point, free licenses are handy,
The only consequence may be that he posts his work somewhere else where the end user won't find it that easily.

This is the quality vs. quantity thing. I prefer this forum to be a friendly place so I don't miss anything if these mods are published elsewhere.

[v-rob]

If something is closed source for Minetest, I won't use it, whether it's on the forums or not. If someone licenses something under a closed source license, that tells me that he/she is more concerned with credit than making a mod for the sake of a good mod that many people will like.

Also, it's not impossible to legally fork a no-deriv software, you just have to convince the copyright owner to allow you doing so!

Let's all go and politely ask Microsoft if we can fork Windows. I'm sure they'll be happy to let us do that.

[TumeniNodes]

since the "dictators" may be wrong too, and the vote may show them that they are wrong.

This is a community forum, not some nation of people with a government.
This entire thing is ridiculous.
You join the community, you do so with understanding what the community rules are, which are in place, and established.
Don't like them? Then go elsewhere, or start your own community.

The rules are what they are, and they were chosen for a reason.
It is a community, based around a free software, which has been around for a while, and has grown under the use of permissive licenses.

I think you have been watching too much tv, movies, or news.
The reasons for which licenses are disallowed have been explained.
This is a community for people who enjoy sharing their works, as well as seeing what others may do with them.
If you do not like this way, perhaps you should find another community which has guidelines / rules more to your liking.

[KGM]

does anyone care about the end user who finds less mods and subgames cause you are disallowing licenses????
Let's all go and politely ask Microsoft if we can fork Windows. I'm sure they'll be happy to let us do that.
> Let's all go and politely ask Microsoft if we can fork Windows. I'm sure they'll be happy to let us do that.
Well, if you're convincing enough :{ )
> Then go elsewhere, or start your own community.

Why not, there are many minetest forks around, and mine would be the best anyway!
And perfectly LEGAL!

You know, all minetest users look for subgames on the forums.

In SUBGAME RELEASES!!!!

If one can't put the subgame one made there, one have to make a minetest fork with the subgame as default!

Since then no one has to install minetest first, you can publish the whole thing like any other app.