Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14
  Print  
Author Topic: ENIGMA's Engine Code License - Please Vote  (Read 25881 times)
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #15 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 08:14:08 PM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Ohio, United States
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2934

View Profile Email
LGPL is too strong. It forces binaries to be separable—ENIGMA would have to be a DLL, and no one likes that. It also makes it legally impossible for us to use link-time inlining. This has proven a problem for MinGW in the past—you'll notice most of the GNU headers don't even use LGPL.

This is in addition to the fact that it offers little more protection for us than MPL.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2014, 10:40:29 PM by Josh @ Dreamland » Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Unknown gender) Darkstar2
Reply #16 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 09:09:21 PM
Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 1213

View Profile Email
Still see a lot of contradiction - you are saying I CAN sell my games and nobody would sue me if I don't include my source code, and by source code you mean including the whole EGM file and possibly all its unencrypted resources with it.  Then you go saying I can sell my free stuff ????  Still confused.  Then you are talking about possibility of people selling ENIGMA which obviously you don't want.  The issue and question I have is selling my GAME, not enigma code or modified code.  The games I want to compile with ENIGMA is with an unmodified ENIGMA version.  So if I read your post currently we have to include the source code to everything we publish using ENIGMA.
But previous I was told otherwise.  Again, which is which.  Now you can clearly see people turning away from using the product and to be honest, paying $299 for the YYC compiler sounds more and more attractive :D  (lol, nah fuck YoYo!).

So worse case scenario, if I make my game and I net $1 million, and I get caught, I will have to forfeit my $1 million and the developers will split the money !  Kinda defeats open source if you ask me, you should have opened a company and made a commercial product instead, people would have gladly paid money for a complete working ENIGMA, anything would be best than being allegedly ripped off by a company selling an inflated product they keep regressing with deprecated functions and severe issues that go unaddressed !

@Rezolyze:  I know how you feel and honestly can't blame you.  Good luck on your quest  to find something, if you do please let me know :D  Wherever you go if it is open source you will have the same issues ! Honestly I shopped around and there are other alternatives, but nowhere near newbie friendly than GayMaker & ENIGMA, they have a much steeper learning curve.

YoYo raelly were on to something BIG but instead they decided to fuck it up and now they are trying to fix the mess they created.

I found ENIGMA attractive for:

1) Compiler, so speedy games and minimal size
2) Flexible, offering useful functions that were removed by YYG ! Including external resource handling, directshow support, etc...

However not at the cost of having to provide my source code and resources files no fucking way.

It was NEVER a question of money.  Perhaps ENIGMA
can resolve this whole license shit debate going nowhere and consider going commercial.  I would gladly pay for a product like ENIGMA.  I know that ENIGMA devs would not rip people off charging $300 for a fucking compiler would be part of the program, and they can charge for exports and other stuff.
GLADLY I would pay, and many would too, and it would resolve the whole problems around licensing !
You'd still have to include a license mentioning ENIGMA and its respective IP holders, the same way you have to with GMS, but at least you would not have to include source of your games with your compiles.......:P

No current license proposed will satisfy BOTH parties, impossible.....They all have pros and cons, and either benefit mostly the user OR ENIGMA dev......there is no balance that protects 50 / 50.  So maybe this whole discussion on license is a waste of time :) ???

From what I understand the biggest issue with ENIGMA is compatibility, it is not 100% compatible to GMS.  However, can one assume it is functional enough to make a full game from scratch?



Logged
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #17 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 09:24:11 PM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Ohio, United States
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2934

View Profile Email
That's because we consistently mince our ideals with our reality.

Right now, we are GPL licensed: you can sell your game, but people have no obligation to buy it from you, because they can get it for free from anyone else. In fact, someone else could sell your game for cheaper than you are selling it. Both of you have to offer the same source, however, so someone would end up giving it out it for free. If the person selling your game didn't give out the source, you could sue them; if you weren't giving out the source to your game, any ENIGMA developer could sue you. Harri is pointing out that it's safe to operate on the assumption that no ENIGMA contributor would want to sue you, however, and so you could theoretically ignore the GPL altogether and do what you like. However, that is not your legal entitlement at this time.

When we finish working out the license, we are doing everything in our power to ensure that you can choose your own license and be the deciding power on the distribution of your own games. But that is later. When we get this sorted out, you will have the law to back you up. For now, you have only our word, which as nasty as it sounds, we could renege on at any time.


The point of the new license is so that you have a legal guarantee to what we're telling you that you can do with your game. Instead of just trusting us not to sue you. You have the same problem when you use GM:S; you're agreeing to a contract you've never seen before between you and Yoyo Games. But for some reason, this seems natural to everyone because they're proprietary! Having licenses with free software is unheard of. I'll grant it's unusual, because usually free software is all about liberties, but we're unique in that we are granting you the special right to take everyone else's right (the right to use and distribute your game freely) away. You can argue all day about whose right that should be, but according to the GPL, it isn't yours. And that's what we need to fix.

So, to reiterate,

Right now, from a legal standpoint, you must distribute the source to your game if you distribute your game, regardless of whether you're charging for the binary. Others are free to distribute it for you, with or without a fee. So your payment would be on the honor system (as it basically is, anyway).

Right now, we are telling you (giving you our word, but not a legal guarantee) that we will not sue you, and you can do what you want. We could turn evil and sue you anyway, though.

In the future, we will have a license that guarantees you our word is good. Picking that license is hard, as people expect us to use a standard free software license or else they'll prefer Yoyo, who uses a non-standard proprietary license (makes the sense none this any of does to me, but that in itself is a bad argument).
« Last Edit: March 20, 2014, 09:28:41 PM by Josh @ Dreamland » Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Unknown gender) Darkstar2
Reply #18 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 09:42:34 PM
Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 1213

View Profile Email
Interesting thanks for that, this opens a door to something else.  So basically what exactly is meant by I have to release my source ? Do I have to include the EGM file in the same folder as the compiled EXE ?  So basically the source (EGM) file would also contain ALL the game resources I busted my ass to create right ? So this means it would completely prevent me from using external / encrypted resources and big games as I would have to also distribute my game resources as well for the EGM to work.  So this would void the point of selling games as anybody could steal my game source and resources and make their own game using another program.   

Also on the topic of being sued.......Do people really get sued ? Rarely do I hear of big companies automatically going into lawsuits without first sending s&D and warnings of retraction. 

So in the case of ENIGMA, what is the worst that could happen ? The developers could require you STOP distributing your games immediately OR provide the source within a reasonable time.....It's hard to imagine they would go right ahead and "SUE" you, right ? wrong ? Also, again, you'd have to be caught.  There are many selling their shit games they made with a cracked GMS on the app stores.... I guess even YoYo mentioned it would not automatically SUE people for using  cracks, but it would only if the game generates profits big enough to warrant the entire process of taking legal actions, EVEN THOUGH the law entitles them to sue regardless on the amount, does not mean they will necessarily..... So I'm assuming ENIGMA is the same.

As far as YoYoGames, I am not aware of any hidden contract.  You are the copyright holder of the game you make and are entitled to do whatever you want.  However YYG are the IP holders of the engine (gay runner) etc.  The contract and limitations is if you decide to publish your games through YYG, however if you decide to publish on your own, your only restrictions are including the YoYoGames license and mention the respective copyright holders.....in this case, the runner / engine belongs to YYG.  Your game belongs to you.

I guess maybe it would have been better for ENIGMA to be a paid product, none of this mess :D
Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) onpon
Reply #19 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 09:49:40 PM

Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 102

View Profile WWW Email
Also on the topic of being sued.......Do people really get sued ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FSF_vs._Cisco
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_Freedom_Law_Center#BusyBox_Litigation
Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) Darkstar2
Reply #20 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 10:06:32 PM
Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 1213

View Profile Email
Also on the topic of being sued.......Do people really get sued ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FSF_vs._Cisco
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_Freedom_Law_Center#BusyBox_Litigation

I should rephrase my question.  Do people get automatically sued ?  usually one would get a warning to stop distributing games, etc.  One would probably get sued if the amount of money is substantial.
Also as per CISCO there was a settlement right ?
Most of the time it is in the best interest for these things to be resolved off court.  So the developer has to comply and stop distributing said software and give the profits they made from said software.  Question now is, how the fuck do the developers determine the exact amount / profits made.

If companies out there exercised their rights as the law permits, entirely by the book, then they would probably spend most of their days in court and millions would get sued daily.  :P 

If you were to steal a $1 chocolate bar from me I could sue you for theft, as the law permits. What I am permitted under the law and do is another story.

Microsoft knows that people are using pirated copies of Windows.....They even warn you if you are using a non genuine version and even encourage you to buy it.  They COULD if they wanted to track you down and sue you for copyright violation and theft.
God forbid if most companies exercised ALL their rights down to the T, there would be a fuckload of lawsuits and there would be nowhere to put serial killers, rapists and hard criminals.  They'd have to build entire city length jail and courts to cater to the high demand and all the people that get their a$$ sued !

So I guess one bit of advice for now.......If your game CAN be made in CrapStudio 1.3, go for it, and sleep while at night.  Otherwise if you don't want to suck their cock and be their slave and deal with the mess that their software has become, then ENIGMA is the right choice, but you have to sell your soul first.

No middle grounds lol. 

Damned if you do damned if you don't.

Logged
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #21 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 10:31:52 PM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Ohio, United States
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2934

View Profile Email
No one can sue you except the authors of the code you used. So, only members of the ENIGMA team. But notably, any member of the ENIGMA team who can prove you are using his or her code. So the odds of someone becoming evil are increased by some 600%, and more so by the fact that some of us are only just becoming financially independent. It's a risk, for users.

But yes, you're at risk of litigation whether you use ENIGMA right now or use GM:S. If you're playing by the rules of the GPL, there's nothing that we could successfully sue you for. But that means payments for your games would be on the honor system, and you wouldn't have special and exclusive rights to them, and that's definitely something for us to be concerned with. Petty theft of simple but fun games is more common than you'd think.
Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Male) time-killer-games
Reply #22 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 10:49:27 PM

Member
Location: Virginia Beach
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1066

View Profile WWW Email
Fuck this topic is a boring read. I'm surprised I picked up any of this. When in doubt, we could always flip a coin or rock paper scissors our way into deciding a new license? I'd find that to be the most rational decision with the given circumstance.

Edit: All I mean by that is that all the license options have their pros and cons, and IMHO, each one has bad enough cons to send this project in the toilet doo-doo hole either way, so it's irrelevant which one we choose. But we need to find a way to "get the best of both worlds" if you know what I mean, that's right, Hannah Montana. I personally find a custom license a best fit, now that I think of it. Is it possible to make a custom non-GPL lisence?
« Last Edit: March 20, 2014, 10:56:25 PM by time-killer-games » Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) Darkstar2
Reply #23 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 10:59:20 PM
Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 1213

View Profile Email
No one can sue you except the authors of the code you used. So, only members of the ENIGMA team. But notably, any member of the ENIGMA team who can prove you are using his or her code

Ok, this part is perfectly clear and I understand. 
So there are 2 things I have to do, link to ENIGMA mentioning I used ENIGMA *AND* include source code which is either the EGM file or EGM + external resources (if applicable).  So if  i decide NOT to supply source code but only link to ENIGMA, that would be giving myself away.... So most people would simply not do either.  Christ I never knew this was such a pain in the arse, who the hell would want to use ENIGMA from this point on ?

Here are things I am wondering about:
1)
BUT here is another problem.  Let's say a person decides to comply and include a link to the ENIGMA repo + supply source material with the game along with the proper license, 100% by the book.  Developer can't be sued right ?  Maybe not, but it opens the door to far bigger problems.  So the person who has paid for my game eventually finds out WHAT I used to make my shit, and even more, has the entire source AND resources along with a link.  He/she/IT could simply use said tool and compile my game and go "hmmm.....this game is free, and some motherfucker charged me $15".  So the developer
gets the heat, charge backs, and reputation ruined.
In other words how the fuck can a developer be able to SELL and PROFIT from a game made in ENIGMA, when the game is free to be distributed by anybody else even FREE of charge, even by the person downloading your game can find out they could have had it for free !  I hope you understand where I am going with this......It would be nearly impossible for a developer to sell and profit from a game made in ENIGMA.

Quote
. So the odds of someone becoming evil are increased by some 600%, and more so by the fact that some of us are only just becoming financially independent. It's a risk, for users.

Regardless, taking legal actions against someone is not as easy as pushing a button.  It's a lot of paper work and expense.  I mean regardless of your financial situation, would you sue me if I made $100 profits from my shitty game ?  It would cost you far more than $100.   Otherwise it all comes down to principles and not money.  Most companies know it is in their best interest to resolve outside courts, it's better for their wallets and public image.   Why are some companies more lenient now toward modders...... no company wants negative press.

Quote
But yes, you're at risk of litigation whether you use ENIGMA right now or use GM:S.

Please enlighten me.  What kind of litigation ? I paid for GM:S and only requirement I am aware of is
including a license of all IP holders, including YoYoGame's runner.  But you are not required to include your source code ! You can sell your game on your own, you own the rights to your game, and YoYo owns the rights to their runner ,which cannot be modified.  Right now to be honest I am very discouraged and I am trying to think of a good reason why I should continue using ENIGMA....I really like the software and the developers are quite different than YYG's developers, there is every bit of reason to use ENIGMA because of its potential, but if I have to be brutally honest, all this talk about the license and
evil and lawsuits and source code  etc really negates all benefits from the project.

Quote
If you're playing by the rules of the GPL, there's nothing that we could successfully sue you for. But that means payments for your games would be on the honor system, and you wouldn't have special and exclusive rights to them,

Josh, I am fucked either way.  If I follow the rules then this means I accept that my game source and its resource be freely available including theft and distributed FREELY.  I'm quite sure the people who pay money for my game would NOT appreciate finding out the same game could be had FREE. 

Let me give you an example.....You know this free flight sim called FlightGear?  It's open source.  The same flight sim is rebranded and  sold on ClickBank for hundreds of $.  I heard a lot of complaints and people charging back their clickbank purchase once they found out they could obtain same software FREE.  I was warned by someone I know who purchased the thing.

So I'd have the right to sell my game, but at the same time it could in theory be distributed freely,
and if not distributed, the person downloading it could realize they could compile a  FREE version and think they got scammed, the same way people who purchased the Pro Simulator on ClickBank felt ripped off.

What does this mean for ENIGMA, your project is also in danger bceause people will not be using ENIGMA with all of this mess..... So leaving the license as is, protects you, but what good is it if nobody will use your software.

Quote
and that's definitely something for us to be concerned with. Petty theft of simple but fun games is more common than you'd think.

I know, software piracy is all around.  But that's a different issue.  A developer who invests sweat and blood into making his / her game with 100% custom made material wants to protect their work.....Not
give away their source and material for the masses to use.

---------------------------------

I think ENIGMA's site should remove the you can sell your game part or add that you have to include source or get sued by the devs. of the code you use in your game :D  The majority of people who use these software are newbies who are not coders and many don't know all these licensing terms.

Logged
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #24 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 11:31:38 PM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Ohio, United States
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2934

View Profile Email
Most people with GPL games simply accept donations. An alternative is to have a purchase page, and offer a free download for users "who have already paid." Of course, they're not obligated to be honest, legally, but it prevents pirates from selling your game for you. You can also do some GPL trolling of your own to ensure that any third-party who is distributing your game is following the license and crediting you in the distribution.

An evil ENIGMA contributor suing you is an unlikely scenario given the overhead of filing a court case, the unlikelihood of being represented by the FSF's lawyers given that the act would be contrary to the spirit of this project, and the statistical unlikelihood of financial payout. But if you are making heaps of money, that starts to go away, and the odds of someone evil wanting their cut is greatly increased. So users would fear their ENIGMA games growing big while they are violating the GPL.

Regarding FlightGear: That's what allowing you to relicense your game is for. But I would argue that in that case, those who paid SHOULD be upset—from what I'm hearing, they are successfully selling it only because their brand is more popular, and it isn't their work to be sold. In your case, however, you are the original author: people shouldn't feel cheated buying your game from you. I got Cave Story for free on the PC. Nicalis teamed up with Pixel and re-released it for the PC and Wii. I bought a copy, not because I really cared about the special features, but because it was an easy way to show my support. I bought Portal 2 for $50 knowing full well I could get it for $20 or less the next month. I'd do it again. I had the option of pirating all of those games illegally, of course, but even if I could have legally obtained them for free, I would have paid for them. People have a lot of success with pay-what-you-want digital property.

But anyway, I am not advocating that all of our users switch to GPL. The GPL is just my personal philosophy. I would encourage it where applicable, but getting it to where users can select there own license is still a priority. I am just trying to make sure that any further proprietary game development environments are not my fault.
Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Unknown gender) onpon
Reply #25 Posted on: March 20, 2014, 11:58:05 PM

Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 102

View Profile WWW Email
I just want to point out some things (some repeats since I started typing before Josh's post above):

- Just because the engine of the game you write is under the GPL doesn't mean your art assets are. I don't know if it's been tested in court, but it's commonly accepted that the game's data, e.g. art assets and scenarios, can be GPL-incompatible. Even completely free/libre games often choose the GPL-incompatible CC BY or CC BY-SA license for such assets, and there are several games whose engines are under the GPL, but whose game data is proprietary. Examples include Doom, AssaultCube, Planeshift, Gish, and The Ur-Quan Masters, among others.

- Just because people can obtain something without paying doesn't mean they won't pay. Supporting the developer of a game you like feels good. In fact, when people are given an option up-front of how much to pay, the average is usually well above the minimum; I recall one example of the "pay what you want" system where the minimum was $1, and the average people were paying was $3. People aren't really as rationally greedy as the capitalist model suggests.

- Just because people can provide something gratis doesn't mean they will. I actually looked to see if I could find copies of some of Jason Rohrer's games' source code so I could see what they were like before paying; these games are in the public domain, so it's perfectly legal to share. I found no such copies. It's easy to understand why if you think about it: people don't just instinctively upload everything they have a copy of somewhere on the Internet just because it's legal. They only do so if they have a reason to, and they usually only have a reason to if there's a huge demand for copies that don't cost anything. If you're at that point, you've already made a lot of money selling copies.

- Selling copies of a game isn't the only way to make money from it. If it's an online game, you can make money from server access; no proprietary software is needed for this. Crowdfunding might also be a way to get the money upfront: basically, being paid to make the game (though I don't think this has been tested much if at all).

- The point of using the GPL isn't to protect the program licensed under it; it's to protect the freedom of the users of the program. Whether or not it's worth it, that depends. I don't think it's worth it to use strong copyleft in ENIGMA's case, because people who would make non-libre game engines would just use Game Maker instead of ENIGMA. Weak copyleft should be used. But to say that it's bad simply because it results in less users ignores the whole point of the GPL. If ENIGMA was attractive enough that it could convince people to use the GPL rather than switching to Game Maker, using the GPL would make perfect sense.

- The Flightgear thing was done by a third party, and that's what made people upset: they were just putting a big price tag on something that was made by someone else and given to them gratis. If the Flightgear devs had been selling the copies and a third party had been giving away copies, it would have been very different.
Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) Darkstar2
Reply #26 Posted on: March 21, 2014, 03:41:58 AM
Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 1213

View Profile Email
Most people with GPL games simply accept donations.

Scenario 1: Hey people I made a stick figure game with 8x8 sprites kindly donate your money for my hard work.

Scenario 2: I made this motherfucker of a game, it has 3D, it has cut scenes, it has original content, music, graphics, if you like MYST this is MYST on steroids..... But I am giving you this 4GB game FREE, BUT if you want kindly donate.......

I think you are being generous on human nature Josh. We are in 2014......People would be willing to rip off good $1-$5 games sold in app stores if they could get it free.  Face it, the only donation I might get is $1 from the guy who will gladly take my source and assets and rebrand it and sell it on fucking Clickbank like the rest of the rebranded shits selling there.....  FREE software sold for $100-$200 on Clickbank......it's pathetic.  I think I get the point of GPL to some extent but it has a VERY evil side to it
and I don't like the smell of it.

Now I am thinking...... ENIGMA devs KNEW what they were getting into when doing open source... They COULD have just made the software a shareware (FREE edition, standard, PRO, etc) problem solved.  But the team decided free open source.

So now, you are telling me that if my game goes viral and is a hit and I "do well", leaving it so vague as to what you would consider "doing well" before you join the darkside and sue me :D you would go after me because even though I mentioned I used ENIGMA
but failed to provide my source code along with all game content I created from scratch....... hmmm.
Even though I did not modify or sell ENIGMA, just making games with it, and acknowledged it, but ENIGMA devs have the right to go after developers because they didn't spread the source code allowing pirates and people with bad intentions to rip your game and sell it or distribute it free ?

Under the current license I am willing to bet nobody will want to use ENIGMA for making games. 

After checking, regarding GameMakerStudio, the only requirements are to include the respective licenses and IP holders along with your game.  They don't require source code distribution.  They do fuck developers in the ass some other ways though  ;D
So it now is a matter of picking your poison :P

Quote
An alternative is to have a purchase page, and offer a free download for users "who have already paid." Of course, they're not obligated to be honest, legally, but it prevents pirates from selling your game for you. You can also do some GPL trolling of your own to ensure that any third-party who is distributing your game is following the license and crediting you in the distribution.

I don't want my games to be distributed by others nor sold by others.  And the last thing I want to see is my $10 game being sold for $200 on Clickbank lol.

If this forum had 1000 ENIGMA users, how many do you honestly believe would want that ? :P  Why do you think YYG was under lots of heat for their weak ass security and how games could be decompiled !
People don't want their source stolen or games ripped off.

If I spend 3 years making a great game why should I accept that some random motherfucker acquires my game for free and sells it and profits / makes big bucks from it, while I make pennies or nothing.

ENIGMA wants to protect its code and you mentioned the reasons why, which is fine........ But seriously, so does the game developer too.  Right now the game developer has no protection.

basically it is like having a bank account with loads of money in it, unlocked and open to the public, with a sign that says "Hey, I have received an inheritance, it's in my bank you are free to come rob me at  your convenience, I'll even give you the key!"

:D

Quote
An evil ENIGMA contributor suing you is an unlikely scenario given the overhead of filing a court case, the unlikelihood of being represented by the FSF's lawyers given that the act would be contrary to the spirit of this project, and the statistical unlikelihood of financial payout. But if you are making heaps of money,

lol define heaps ? I mean seriously, how much could one expect to make, couple of hundreds at most ? if you are lucky.  Some popular GM made game despite media coverage failed to earn more than few hundreds......Probably what it would cost to do the paperwork :D

So if my game makes millions I could just run away to some remote island (if I knew your addy I could send you a generous donation :D :D :D)

Seriously I think there are good solid arguments here as to why this whole licensing thing should get resolved and resolved as quick as possible.
But if you do decide to scrap open source free and sell it, I will be your first paid customer, providing of course the software is functional.

Quote
that starts to go away, and the odds of someone evil wanting their cut is greatly increased. So users would fear their ENIGMA games growing big while they are violating the GPL.

There could be loopholes or ways to get around that.

Example, you make the core of your game, include few levels, sort of a limited edition, and make it  free.  If people want to buy the full version, instead of buying a new compiled EXE they would be buying CONTENT, that they could plug into your game, think of it as they are buying a DLC.  You have previously coded your free game EXE to handle the DLC format you will be using. SO.....the person is buying an extension of your game as a DLC, to which you made entirely on your own without use of ENIGMA....
Now I know what  you are thinking....."But anybody could see your custom decryption in the source"
lol.  Well you could code your decrypter using another program and have it called from ENIGMA.  So they could see in your source, calls to external programs,
but still won't know what to do.

Does providing the source code only relate to games SOLD ? or both for profit and free ENIGMA made games?

Quote
Regarding FlightGear: That's what allowing you to relicense your game is for. But I would argue that in that case, those who paid SHOULD be upset—from

EXACTLY!!! And I am glad you said that.  People ARE upset.  I know a few people who got had from this, I think it is called FlightSimPro, they all filed for refund, as they have a 60day refund policy.....and ClickBank has to abide.

So put yourself in our shoes.....Trying to make money, but people finding out that our games can be had for free and start charging back...What do you
think that  does to a PayPal account or any payment processor ? They cut you off.

Quote
what I'm hearing, they are successfully selling it only because their brand is more popular,

They are SHIT.  You can get the same software FREE, online, the core + the entire world scenary DVDs, you can order them or download them FREE.  People who buy Clickbank garbage are not aware that majority of products sold in that garbage dump of a network can be had for FREE online and often with better support and faster performance as sometimes the shit they rebrand on CB have wrappers / advertising / upselling crap.

I've made couple of purchases on CB myself, in 100% of my purchases the product I received was hype and did not deliver as per claims.....so it was refund in all cases......Then I found out I  could often get the same software *FREE* or at a much better price.

I see a lot of GNU software being rebranded and distributed by some network affiliates / advertisers who WRAP those apps with malware, trojans, adware, spyware and place them on offer walls
on GPT sites and advertising networks......People
downloading the crap complain and it ruins the reputation of the original developer who made the software, because people think the malware comes from the original developer......

The way I see it OpenSource was a bad idea for ENIGMA or ANY worthwhile program that can be used for evil potentially damaging the reputation of its respective authors, unless there is a solid license
that protects developers because they are the ones
who worked their ass to make the game, while at the same time protecting ENIGMA.....why the hell is it so difficult to cover both arses ?  Remember ENIGMA would be nothing without people using it, and scared shitless.....the same that the game developer using ENIGMA would be nowhere without ENIGMA and stuck sucking YYG's cock.

I still can't believe that there can't be custom / exemptions particularly for developers, such as
requiring they mention ENIGMA and link to it, but
not having to release source code and game content.

Quote
and it isn't their work to be sold. In your case, however, you are the original author: people shouldn't feel cheated buying your game from you.

Yeah? And what happens when later people find out that the same game I sold them, can be had for FREE or less $...Who's going to be blamed, I WILL, I will be accused of ripping people off, and people will chargeback.  Even worse, I am telling people "Hey, the game you just paid me $20 for, includes all my source code and ALL my content along with it and even a link to the FREE ENIGMA....so you can even install it and compile my source code, but wait, you could have gotten my game FREE and you were never legally obliged to even pay me !"

I don't think people would be happy... You know how internet works.......Word goes around and before
you know it it's all over facebook, twitter, youtube,
etc.

Quote
I got Cave Story for free on the PC. Nicalis teamed up with Pixel and re-released it for the PC and Wii. I bought a copy, not because I really cared about the special features, but because it was an easy way to show my support. I bought Portal 2 for $50 knowing

You have good intentions.   You are part of a minority so one must always assume the worse.  Piracy, game theft, etc is a major problem.....the whole idea with
copy protection is to deter piracy, obviously it dose not completely eliminate it.

But giving away source code + my game content is
encouraging it and facilitating it!  Because if I were to use proprietary encryption of my external game resources, anybody could use my source code and decrypt and steal all my game assets, easily......

Quote
But anyway, I am not advocating that all of our users switch to GPL. The GPL is just my personal philosophy. I would encourage it where applicable, but getting it to where users can select there own license is still a priority. I am just trying to make sure that any further proprietary game development environments are not my fault.

It's sad.  Essentially GM is getting stronger and ENIGMA is ..... well I read some people using the term "vaporware" before !  is this true ?

So I guess I have to make sure my game are shitty enough never to be a major hit that can get me
sued but at the same time not too shitty enough to be sold and make a few bucks..... :D

Imagine once you will be able to render video /cut scenes inside surfaces and make those myst like games on steroids, it's not improbable that under the right hands a developer could make good money.....
but once they see that ENIGMA has potential but
its weakest link is its license, then they will look
elsewhere.

@TKG:  How would you feel once your Dungeon Blabber game is done, it takes you 3 years of hard work, then you release it, but with the current license it gives people the right to RIP off all your content, pirate and re-sell your game.  Would you accept that ?
Would you be happy ?

Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) The 11th plague of Egypt
Reply #27 Posted on: March 21, 2014, 03:52:37 AM
Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 284

View Profile
Thanks for asking the community about this choice, and taking the time to go through with this.
I thik can feel some of your love for this project and its community now :)

I still like the middle ground, and hope eventual conflicts can be solved.

BTW when this is done, we could go register a trademark :D
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 03:56:03 AM by The 11th plague of Egypt » Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) Darkstar2
Reply #28 Posted on: March 21, 2014, 04:00:35 AM
Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 1213

View Profile Email
Thanks for asking the community about this choice, and taking the time to go through with this.
I thik can feel some of your love for this project and its community now :)

I still like the middle ground, and hope eventual conflicts can be solved.

BTW when this is done, we could go register a trademark :D

LOL!


Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) TheExDeus
Reply #29 Posted on: March 21, 2014, 01:08:06 PM

Developer
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1886

View Profile
Darkstar2: You keep blowing all of this out of proportion and type very emotionally. So to wrap it up:
1) There is no automatic suing robot. And GPL doesn't mean that a random person can sue you. The only ones who could sue anyone is ENIGMA dev's.
2) As you already said, suing is time and money consuming. So it's virtually impossible that anyone from ENIGMA dev team would be active enough to do so. Only maybe Robert during one of his sissy fits could summon the time (but not money) to sue someone. But even he is too lazy for that.
3) That is why we a trying to choose a license. It's not that if we don't do so in the next 24h the world will explode. The discussions have been massive on the subject and I don't think much more will happen. We basically have two possibilities when thinking about users: MPL and possibly endanger ENIGMA at some point or other license with custom exceptions/custom license which are both a lot riskier (as it normally requires a very expensive legal staff to be done properly).
4) That "ENIGMA is dying" or "no one will use ENIGMA" are both stupid statements. I have been here since 2008 (that's 6 years for the mathematically impaired) and I can tell you that nothing has really changed. We work on it as we see fit and at the pace we have time for. It will probably be the same in the next 6 years as well. The leaps in functionality have been tremendous during the past year though. And could be as big this year.

Quote
copy protection is to deter piracy
And almost exclusively does the opposite. I, like Josh, have paid for games that are available for less or even free, because I enjoyed them. Look at Humble Bundle for example. Some pay 1000$ for 5 games and in turn that person compensates for 500 who paid only $1. But most pay more. Just like Game Newel from Valve said - Piracy is a service problem. That means if a pirate gives better service, like when a single player games that work without a constant internet connection using a crack, but requires internet connection otherwise, then the user will choose the crack. Many people play with cracked games even though they have legal copies for them. Especially few years back when CD's where mandatory for games - NoCD cracks flourished. There have been many instances when a pirate could get a game, install the game, play the game and then even finish the game days before the legit user could. Only because the legit user needed to wait 3 days before DRM servers were back online (happened with AC, Diablo3, Battlefield, COD and so on). In Humbe Bundle you can also see that the ones who pay more are usually Linux users, those who's software are usually free (and GPL'd).
I for example now buy games almost exclusively from GOG.com. They never have DRM and so I can buy a game, install it and play it within 15minutes. No fuss with DRM's.
So in short - Yes, people will buy games they can download for free. Children won't, because they don't have money. But people with jobs will. That is why I torrented all games when I was 10-18 years of age, but now haven't downloaded an illegal game in years. I buy all of them because I can and I want too.

Quote
Trying to make money, but people finding out that our games can be had for free and start charging back...
They weren't trying to get back money because the software was free. They were trying to get money back because they were essentially scammed. Another took the source, didn't even add anything to it, and then sold it as their own. I am sure most of the people who bought and enjoyed the software would of easily paid the 40$ to the real dev's. But they were upset that they basically paid a nobody.

Quote
People don't want their source stolen or games ripped off.
TBH, those are only children who even make "fake companies" just to have a logo in front of the game. AAA games or even Inide devs couldn't give less shits about that. GPL, as far as I know, doesn't even require you to provide other resources. So you can provide the code, but all the other resources could be removed from that. The thing is though, that resources are extremely easy to get from any game or program. It takes seconds for you to launch a debugger, open a game, and save a texture (that included sprite sheets and so on). As that is very easy, most developers, big and small, don't hide those resources. If you download any Source engine game, for example, then in the folders there are plain resources for your taking. Same with Unreal, Cryengine and so on.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 01:11:38 PM by TheExDeus » Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14
  Print