[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ri-li re-wrapped as commercial game by jalada GmbH



On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:15:42AM +0200, Guus Sliepen wrote:

> > > I just noticed that ri-li is sold as a commercial game here:
> > > http://www.jalada.eu/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=162&Itemid=239&lang=en_EU
> > > 
> > > Is this a GPL violation or do they have your permission?
> > > 
> > > It looks like they are doing this with a whole set of FOSS games:
> > > http://www.geardownload.com/developers/jalada-gmbh.html
> 
> gpl-violations.org is willing to deal with this, providing the upstream
> copyright authors allow them to contact Jalada on their behalf. 

I just want to inform you that I have asked Jalada for the source code for
their versions of blobwars and blobandconquer, and I have received them after
less than a day. I have also asked where they have put their written offer for
the source code, as required by the GPL. After installing Jalada's games, the
first! time you run the game, there will be a dialog showing an End User
License Agreement. Section 5 of the EULA contains the offer, so it seems the
requirements of the GPL are all met, more or less. If there are some issues
left, I am sure that can be worked out as well.

As for the source code, there is no attempt at obfuscating the true origin of
it. Jalada has indeed put effort in porting the games to MacOS, and there are
some genuine improvements in the code that can now, as intended by the GPL, be
merged back into the original versions.

So please do not claim that Jalada is violating the GPL. But I do urge the
other maintainers and/or the upstream developers to check that the ports Jalada
made of their games do indeed also contain the offer, that you can still find
copyright notices of the original version, and that you can indeed get the
source code.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
      Guus Sliepen <guus@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: