Re: Bug#662923: Please advise if fheroes2 is suitable for non-free?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 12-03-12 21:13, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>> Apparently author's intent is to enforce non-commercial
>> restriction to the binaries.
>
> It makes at least binaries, and most probably the source code
> non-distributable. To the point that upstream CANNOT distribute it
> ;-)...
This is not true. Upstream is the copyright holder, and doesn't need a
license to distribute it. If he wants to give conflicting licenses,
then that means the the person receiving the files effectively doesn't
have a license at all (and so may not redistribute it).
> GPL was designed precisely to prevent that kind of situation. Hence
> even non-free is completely out of question.
>
> It may be worth signaling that to upstream, that will have either
> to choose to relicense the AI or relicense the GPLed code or
> rewrite the AI, for anyone to be able to legally use the game.
Most likely, he will want to add an exception to the GPL'd code to
allow linking to the AI. Of course we'd rather see the AI relicensed,
but if he'd want to do that, he'd probably have licensed it under the
GPL in the first place.
Thanks,
Bas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAk9ecgQACgkQFShl+2J8z5X1uQCg2SO1/XIVhFZN5LBH+XapCs1A
nT0An2ReieelTe5+BbO2hF3DudfNv5MX
=Oa6u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: