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

Re: Licensing Issues for Proprietary Game Assets

On 02/03/2017 12:09, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Mar 2017 at 09:41:30 +0200, Kyle Robbertze wrote:
>> Is it possible to package this for Debian with the asset license as is?
> Probably not. This sounds like a job for game-data-packager to me:
> it downloads and repackages proprietary game assets, or reads them
> from a non-distributable GOG or Steam package or a CD-ROM or whatever,
> and produces and installs a .deb that is not redistributable. Have a
> look at iortcw to see how that typically works (data/rtcw.yaml in
> game-data-packager is the corresponding description of the proprietary
> assets).

Thanks, I will have a look.

> game-data-packager was originally for game assets that are sold commercially
> and are not legally distributable at all, but freely downloadable assets with
> an unclear or otherwise unacceptable license are also in-scope.
> If the proprietary assets are downloadable in an automated way using standard
> tools (game-data-packager uses Python's built-in HTTP support), then
> game-data-packager will be able to create empty-epsilon-data entirely
> automatically, like it does for several games in the Zork series.

I should be able to pull them from upstream's Github repo

> [1] I'm assuming there isn't an alternative set of Free assets that would
>     allow it to be in main, like OpenArena for the Quake III Arena engine?

Unfortunately not at the moment. I have raised the issue upstream [1]
and I wait to see what they say.

[1] https://github.com/daid/EmptyEpsilon/issues/443


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: