How do you think about %TOPIC_TITLE%quot;Forbidden license%TOPIC_TITLE%quot; paragraph?

[benrob0329]

Actually, the LGPL fulfills all the DFSGs. The closed source forks on Gplay are illegal, because the LGPL requires that the source code be published in an accessible way. I also believe that the micro transactions many of them add go against the (L)GPL, because it has very strict wording for how monetary payment for the software can be executed.

[LMD]

Let me show you a worst case scenario :
1. I myself(or somebody else) writes GREAT code(well this actually implies it must've been me ;-) )
2. Somebody steals my work, SELLING it
3. I am at home, hitting my head all day long, shouting AARGH
4. AARGH

One bad thing which happened(or could happen, not sure) to MT is the following : A fork, which is fine with the LGPL, source released, allows users to PAY for fly(which is a cheat on some servers) - CTF is rushed by mobile players who now REALLY want to fly as they PAYED for it. Their IP changes constantly - sometimes, it's the WIFI at McDonald's, sometimes at Starbucks, and YAY, their Home IP is dynamic. CTF Server can SHUT DOWN.

Let me sum up why you should allow restrictive licenses :
1. You have only got a few good modders, after the "Minetest Split" between 5 and 0.4 probably even less, there are few people to even notice a good mod
2. This means you should not restrict the modders in their choice of licenses - else you may loose some. A few modders less already means far less content created. Also, of the 2000 mods that are currently out there are :
- Tons that are outdated(incompatible with modern Lua / MT)
- Tons that are too buggy
- Tons that are hardly configurable, badly engineered and inefficient(lagmakers)
- Tons that don't really improve gameplay(only adding few new nodes, few baubles(my mod !))
- Only a few really important ones(right now Wesh comes to my mind)

I'm really trying to calm down

[Wuzzy]

Let me show you a worst case scenario :
1. I myself(or somebody else) writes GREAT code(well this actually implies it must've been me ;-) )
2. Somebody steals my work, SELLING it
3. I am at home, hitting my head all day long, shouting AARGH
4. AARGH

See, I will never understand this attitude. First, software cannot be stolen, only copied. So someone else is better off. Nothing bad happens to you. So the reaction is illogical.

People can legally try to sell Minetest. The license allows it. The difficult part is to find a buyer because they have to compete against free. :-) The same is the case for 99% of mods. Please understand that NonCommercial clauses cause more trouble than they solve. Also: Obligatory reading material.

One bad thing which happened(or could happen, not sure) to MT is the following : A fork, which is fine with the LGPL, source released, allows users to PAY for fly(which is a cheat on some servers) - CTF is rushed by mobile players who now REALLY want to fly as they PAYED for it. Their IP changes constantly - sometimes, it's the WIFI at McDonald's, sometimes at Starbucks, and YAY, their Home IP is dynamic. CTF Server can SHUT DOWN.

This is completely off-topic.

1. You have only got a few good modders, after the "Minetest Split" between 5 and 0.4 probably even less, there are few people to even notice a good mod

Name me ONE good modder who fully insists on their full copyright.

2. This means you should not restrict the modders in their choice of licenses - else you may loose some. A few modders less already means far less content created. Also, of the 2000 mods that are currently out there are :
- Tons that are outdated(incompatible with modern Lua / MT)
- Tons that are too buggy
- Tons that are hardly configurable, badly engineered and inefficient(lagmakers)
- Tons that don't really improve gameplay(only adding few new nodes, few baubles(my mod !))
- Only a few really important ones(right now Wesh comes to my mind)

Crap is crap, regardless of licensing.

How many modders do you know that have stopped to mod because we reject anti-freedom clauses? I don't see them. So I don't see any benefit in allowing proprietary here. It doesn't make sense.

I like to remind you that Minetest is an island of freedom in an ocean of proprietary software. The whole POINT of Minetest is to be a free/libre alternative to Minecraft. Take this away, and you damage one of the few islands of freedom, until it eventually is no better than Minecraft.

If we flood minetest.net with kinds of proprietary mods, then what exactly sets us apart from Minecraft? Nothing! Freedom was and is always our #1 selling point. In this community you kind of get used to the safe atmosphere of copying and remixing stuff without fear of getting your ass sued off so that it is easy to forget how valuable this freedom actually is.

Look, here's the deal: YOU get for free a giant library of free mods with which you can use as you please. You can do many things safely. You can't say that for many other pieces of software. In return, you agree to respect OUR freedoms as well should YOU ever release a mod. Is that a fair deal? I think it is a fair deal. The good old “tit for tat” principle. It just works!
The fact that basically everyone agreed to some baseline freedom rules meant we have grown as a community.

Imagine every modder would insist on their copyright and forbid everything. What a sad, sad place it would be. The insistence on free/libre mods is of CRITICAL importance for our project.

“Restricting choice of license” sounds like a restriction. But it's paradox. Freedom has to end where it interferes with the freedom of other people. And this is exactly the case with restrictive licenses.

I think the argument of “we might lose modders” is weak for the simple reason that modders who insist on their anti-freedom licensing are very rare around here. Most people “get” why we have those rules, and respect the freedom of others, because they understand that it is benefitial to the community.

[TumeniNodes]

LMD, in case you have not noticed... some modders in this community are professional programmers/coders, etc., and when they mod for MT, they do it for fun and relaxation. Sometimes it is due to an attachment to the project.
They get to do what they want to do, without it being what they have to do, or get paid to do. (somehow, it makes it quite enjoyable)
Some also do it because they like to share, help, and teach others, due to a sincere liking of the opensource community, and the ideology behind it.

As Wuzzy said, very few have come with the intent of trying to push proprietary code, and those who have do not stick around long.
When someone joins this community/project in particular, they know what they are joining, and they understand the concepts the community/project follows.

I have said this before, and I will say it as often as required.
It makes absolutely no sense for someone with proprietary intent, to join this community/project, and to think they are going to change the core of it all.
The most that will be accomplished, is that individual being miserable and discontent, and annoying others. Where is the fun in that? Unless they just enjoy being a troll, and a killjoy.

I have zero problems with the existence of proprietary code/software... as long as it's not here.
There are plenty of projects, communities, and places where proprietary code/software is welcome and accepted.