Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Discuss the future of Warzone 2100 with us.
User avatar
lav_coyote25
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3434
Joined: 08 Aug 2006, 23:18

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by lav_coyote25 » 24 Sep 2006, 06:36

geeeeez loooweeeezzz.!!! >:(


what part isnt being understood.


the source code = BOTH of the damn parts... source files and data files.

the references can be found on the rts.net site.  we were supposed to ask questions of whatsisface and VirgilGlyph (rmanjack) was to get those to him for answering when he could ( busy schedule?! :-\ ::) :o ;))  anyways.  you will have to go and do the same search. 
‎"to prepare for disaster is to invite it, to not prepare for disaster is a fools choice" -me (kim-lav_coyote25-metcalfe) - it used to be attributed to unknown - but adding the last bit , it now makes sense.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Rman Virgil » 25 Sep 2006, 01:37

.........

* Sorry I didn't come to this sooner... (Lav_Coyote gave me a heads-up via e-mail yesterday... I had 2 team-leaders let-go at my company last week & have to run those teams as well as my own for 10 days of field Ops - a hectic proposition logistically &, naturally, with the group system dynamics as well.)

* I understand the concerns expressed here.

* DevUrandom - what you have done is positive. The Eidos contact name is in the "Read Me" that came with the source....

* HOWEVER - Eidos is NOT the same company it was when the source was liberated.

* Eidos was subsumed (taken-over) by the company that owns Pivotal well over a year ago ! Which means Eidos assets are owned by SCi / Gotham Games - who in-turn own Pivotal !!...)

* That being said - I will touch base with my contacts on getting posted a legally binding doc that clarifies the issues of concern expressed herein vis-a-vis the GPL wording.

* I don't expect my reassurences over these matters to carry any weight even though they are based on almost 7 years communication with the Creators of WZ2100 (believe me nothing bad is gonna happen over what has been done to date with the source... WZ Creators are VERY happy with all your efforts and their business relationship with their parent company SCi, who own Eidos assets inc. WZ, are excellent. When the source was released they just didn't pay close attention to making any modifications to the GPL BOILERPLATE doc that would more accurately reflect their wishes in the continued development of WZ... that's all there is to it.. There are no draconian motives at play, though a literal interpretation of the boilerplate wording may suggest it to the GPL community watchdogs who would naturally, & conservatively, prefer to err on the side of hyper-caution. In Dec. '04 for WZ Creators to just go with the GPL boilerplate was k.i.s.s. and didn't require the additional expense of having an attorney redo the wording of the source distro doc)...

* So... As you continue your appropriate efforts DevU... I will also follow-up thru my channels on getting a transparently clear legal go-ahead made public on the data & cam content, etc.

* I will be in-touch with any results on my end, of course.

- carpe diem with gusto, rv :)
Last edited by Rman Virgil on 25 Sep 2006, 07:21, edited 1 time in total.
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

User avatar
DevUrandom
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1690
Joined: 31 Jul 2006, 23:14

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by DevUrandom » 25 Sep 2006, 11:39

To those who think that I don't want to believe them or whatever:
As it is not legaly sure that the data is GPL (an intention and possible meaning is no insurance) Linux distributions like Debian won't distribute our game. Also Gna only allows GPLed stuff on their servers and they might kick us as soon as they find out. (It is legaly problematic for them as they might get sued as well.)

I had a talk with Per and we think that it would be best if I'd be the contact and that we should write to the SFLC (http://www.softwarefreedom.org/) to ask them if they can give us any help interpreting that readme.txt file.

So the plan to force Eidos to do anything has been abandoned (several others also requested on IRC not doing it).
Instead I want to ask the SFLC, experts on the area of GPL and free software projects.
Central questions will be
- how they interprete the readme.txt
- whether we may assume that the data is GPL
- whether we can tell that in the public and "simply put it under the GPL"
- whether we can use it but not under the GPL and how we can distribute in
that case
- or whether we must completely drop the data.

If you, Virgil, can get any official response from Eidos/Pivotal or whoever else the Copyright holder is currently, than that would be even better...
Probably the very best that could happen is if they put a new download of the GPL release (a rerelease) up on their official servers with a new readme.txt in it. That way we can be sure that noone is tricking us to make us assume that we are operating on the GPL and also have a clear statement what we are really working on.
If that is not possible ... Well than it is not.
I'll ask the SFLC anyway.
Last edited by DevUrandom on 25 Sep 2006, 11:42, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Rman Virgil » 25 Sep 2006, 12:12

* Having worked in the litigation field for 12 years I understand the need for a clear legal reassurance doc.

* A 2-pronged tac to this end can be effective. (Eidos per se is no longer a legal factor so it is best dropped as you can see).

* Your new course is sound, imho, DevU.

* I'll follow up with the current copyright holders as suggested - new source distro, legal use doc, etc.

- rv :)
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

User avatar
DevUrandom
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1690
Joined: 31 Jul 2006, 23:14

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by DevUrandom » 25 Sep 2006, 12:30

Thanks Rman.
I'll keep you up to date. Email will be sent and posted here this evening (CET).
Erm, tomorrow...
Last edited by DevUrandom on 26 Sep 2006, 00:23, edited 1 time in total.

Kamaze
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1017
Joined: 30 Jul 2006, 15:23

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Kamaze » 25 Sep 2006, 16:25

The contact person in the readme (Alex M) works now at Pivotal-Games.

See http://www.pivotalgames.com/index.php?c ... =directors

...the last one.
We all have the same heaven, but not the same horizon.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Rman Virgil » 26 Sep 2006, 01:37

Kamaze wrote: The contact person in the readme (Alex M) works now at Pivotal-Games.

See http://www.pivotalgames.com/index.php?c ... =directors

...the last one.
* Alex McLean I know & communicate with - he was the lead software engineer for WZ at Pumpkin Studios before they formed  Pivotal with most of the crew from Pumpkin.

* The other name was the  contact at Eidos / Germany who helped us get the source liberated. However he can no longer help as Eidos is a subsidiary of SCi - who own Pivotal as well as Eidos assets.

- RV :)
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

Kamaze
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1017
Joined: 30 Jul 2006, 15:23

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Kamaze » 26 Sep 2006, 19:15

Rman Virgil wrote:
Kamaze wrote: The contact person in the readme (Alex M) works now at Pivotal-Games.

See http://www.pivotalgames.com/index.php?c ... =directors

...the last one.
* Alex McLean I know & communicate with - he was the lead software engineer for WZ at Pumpkin Studios before they formed  Pivotal with most of the crew from Pumpkin.

* The other name was the  contact at Eidos / Germany who helped us get the source liberated. However he can no longer help as Eidos is a subsidiary of SCi - who own Pivotal as well as Eidos assets.

- RV :)
Eidos germany? Huh?
http://www.eidos.de/corporate/people.html
Who?

And why shouldnt he able to help?

Queswtions over questions... :)
We all have the same heaven, but not the same horizon.

cybersphinx
Inactive
Inactive
Posts: 1688
Joined: 01 Sep 2006, 19:17

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by cybersphinx » 26 Sep 2006, 19:51

Kamaze wrote:And why shouldnt he able to help?
http://www.mcvuk.com/newsitem.php?id=237?
We want information... information... information.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Rman Virgil » 01 Oct 2006, 21:46

* Corporate movement when not called to any obvious self-interest is glacial slow.

* In other words, the process of re-writeing the GPL to reflect the CH's intent and also suit the orgs that provide freebie services for the WZ source development won't happen as quickly as we'd like - though measures have been taken to set it in motion.

* However, there is an "ace in the hole" - speaking in terms of poker-play which IMHO is relevant under these circumstances.

* What is that "ace in the hole"...(which anyone here can excercise as well... it is all simply a matter of fact,  inclination & werewithall.)

* As much as I appreciate NGOs & Non-Profit Orgs (like those that have provided for WZ's dev & distribution to date), they are NOT the only "game" in town.

* Which means - I donot have to be beholden to, hog-tied or constrained by their policy in exchange for "freebie services".

* I'm quite comfortable operating as a free-agent in a global, free-enterprise, economy.

* Which tranlates to the GPL WZ like so:

* ALL the WZ files can be put on my virtual server for dl & OSS dev ('cept the .rpl MBs & music) fully confident that SCi / Pivotal will NOT shut me down.

* Because that is a confidence I donot expect anyone here (or any of the aforementioned orgs who can pull the plug on their freebie services) to share it is a responsibility I'm willing to personnally support. Which means I'll put my $$ where my mouth has spoken to.

* Further more, I can run a Professional Web PR / Publicity Campaign that within 2-3 weeks would easily rival, if not exceed, the downloads that can be ascribed to the whole lot of "freebie / distro" channels that are currently being relied upon.

* Like I said, plainly a matter of fact course anyone here has the perogative (if not the wherewithall) to undertake at any time.... Not just me.

* Ponder it - express your thoughts, concerns, etc..

* This is merely a suggestion as an alternate route for moving foward while the legal rewrite is proceeding - as slow as pouring syrup in freezing weather. Or you can wait it out in the present state were nothing is being offered to the gaming public. It's a decision to be made by the devs of WZ - not me.

Carpe diem with gusto & grace, RV :)
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Rman Virgil » 03 Oct 2006, 14:02

* Due to the under-whelming response I'll venture the status quo will do till such a time as the re-written license becomes available to satisfy all true believers.

* I'll surely let you all know ASAP when such occurs.

* Till then, I shall...

Carpe Diem with gusto & grace in other realms of wonder, RV :D
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

xpanthom
Greenhorn
Posts: 6
Joined: 04 Oct 2006, 14:50

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by xpanthom » 04 Oct 2006, 15:46

Re our discussion on IRC last Friday:

I discussed the matter with the assistant professor yesterday, and he pretty much agreed with me.

WZ was released through the readme, and thus it can be regarded as a contract. The Resurrection project has been working on BZ for two years believing that also the data was free, however the proprietors have not objected to this, even though the fact that the data has been used should have been easily visible to anyone involved. Therefore, it can be assumed that the data is also free. This derives from the globally accepted principle of the protection of good faith (bona fides). Since the developers at the Resurrection project have been acting in good faith, this should be awarded protection.

Since this issue is more about contract law than intellectual property law, it is not necessary to find out whether the data is part of the source or whether the data files in themselves are copyrightable works.

Of course, the final legal status of the data files can only be established in court, which is generally the case whenever copyright is involved. But I find it unnecessary to be overcautious here.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by Rman Virgil » 05 Oct 2006, 04:06

* Exactly on all counts !

* Which is why (among other reasons) I know SCi / Pivotal would NOT shut down the WZ Resurrection Project.

* However, what I discern from the current dev team is a concern for how the "freebie" service providors "see" things to the extent that "they" (NOT SCi / Pivotal) would withdraw their support - on this I have already stated how very easy it is to nullify.

- RV
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

User avatar
lav_coyote25
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3434
Joined: 08 Aug 2006, 23:18

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by lav_coyote25 » 05 Oct 2006, 05:28

Rman Virgil wrote: * Exactly on all counts !
* Which is why (among other reasons) I know SCi / Pivotal would NOT shut down the WZ Resurrection Project.
* However, what I discern from the current dev team is a concern for how the "freebie" service providors "see" things to the extent that "they" (NOT SCi / Pivotal) would withdraw their support - on this I have already stated how very easy it is to nullify.
- RV
Rman Virgil wrote: * Corporate movement when not called to any obvious self-interest is glacial slow.
* In other words, the process of re-writeing the GPL to reflect the CH's intent and also suit the orgs that provide freebie services for the WZ source development won't happen as quickly as we'd like - though measures have been taken to set it in motion.
* However, there is an "ace in the hole" - speaking in terms of poker-play which IMHO is relevant under these circumstances.
* What is that "ace in the hole"...(which anyone here can excercise as well... it is all simply a matter of fact,  inclination & werewithall.)
* As much as I appreciate NGOs & Non-Profit Orgs (like those that have provided for WZ's dev & distribution to date), they are NOT the only "game" in town.
* Which means - I donot have to be beholden to, hog-tied or constrained by their policy in exchange for "freebie services".
* I'm quite comfortable operating as a free-agent in a global, free-enterprise, economy.
* Which tranlates to the GPL WZ like so:
* ALL the WZ files can be put on my virtual server for dl & OSS dev ('cept the .rpl MBs & music) fully confident that SCi / Pivotal will NOT shut me down.
* Because that is a confidence I donot expect anyone here (or any of the aforementioned orgs who can pull the plug on their freebie services) to share it is a responsibility I'm willing to personnally support. Which means I'll put my $$ where my mouth has spoken to.
* Further more, I can run a Professional Web PR / Publicity Campaign that within 2-3 weeks would easily rival, if not exceed, the downloads that can be ascribed to the whole lot of "freebie / distro" channels that are currently being relied upon.
* Like I said, plainly a matter of fact course anyone here has the perogative (if not the wherewithall) to undertake at any time.... Not just me.
* Ponder it - express your thoughts, concerns, etc..
* This is merely a suggestion as an alternate route for moving foward while the legal rewrite is proceeding - as slow as pouring syrup in freezing weather. Or you can wait it out in the present state were nothing is being offered to the gaming public. It's a decision to be made by the devs of WZ - not me.
Carpe diem with gusto & grace, RV :)

just so we are all on the same page. ;D   
‎"to prepare for disaster is to invite it, to not prepare for disaster is a fools choice" -me (kim-lav_coyote25-metcalfe) - it used to be attributed to unknown - but adding the last bit , it now makes sense.

jeff_sadowski
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 20
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 04:18

Re: Warzone 2100 licensing and copyright issues

Post by jeff_sadowski » 05 Oct 2006, 07:22

This thread frightens me is this at rest?

If not is there a way I can buy the old game for a resonable price for the data files? maybe ebay huh?
Or would that too be questionable on legitamicy?

Post Reply