GPL Question:

[Mexicouger]

If a Kurok modification doesn't release the source code for the engine, is that Breaking GPL? I am just curious because a friend said it wouldn't.

I am mostly referring to this Mod:

http://forums.daedalusx64.com/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=2914

[Downsider]

Focus on your own shit.

[frag.machine]

If a Kurok modification doesn't release the source code for the engine, is that Breaking GPL? I am just curious because a friend said it wouldn't.

I am mostly referring to this Mod:

http://forums.daedalusx64.com/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=2914

GPL rule of thumb: if binaries are released, the source code must be released, too. Or, at least, must be available thru ftp or e-mail request.

[mh]

No, it's not breaking the GPL. You don't have to publicly release the source at any point in time according to the GPL, but what you do have to do is offer to give it to anyone who asks for it (optionally at a cost).

In the case of a mod, provided they haven't also modified the engine, they don't have to do anything. Just point anyone who downloads it at the original distribution and that's all that's needed to satisfy the GPL.

[Mexicouger]

Focus on your own shit.

My source is released dumbass

[Downsider]

Focus on your own shit.

My source is released dumbass

I obviously meant stop worrying about other people and focus on your own work.

[metlslime]

No, it's not breaking the GPL. You don't have to publicly release the source at any point in time according to the GPL, but what you do have to do is offer to give it to anyone who asks for it (optionally at a cost).

I don't think you can charge for the source, only the binaries. Otherwise, people who want to go closed-source can just charge a trillion dollars for it.

[frag.machine]

No, it's not breaking the GPL. You don't have to publicly release the source at any point in time according to the GPL, but what you do have to do is offer to give it to anyone who asks for it (optionally at a cost).

I don't think you can charge for the source, only the binaries. Otherwise, people who want to go closed-source can just charge a trillion dollars for it.

AFAIK you cannot charge only by the source. I know a couple companies who sell GPL licensed software ( http://www.atlassian.com and http://www.pentaho.com comes to my mind) whom charge by their software, but makes their source available without additional charge.

[mh]

According to the text of the GPL you can charge up to the cost of distributing the source.

b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange;

This is GPL 2 which is most relevant for Quake stuff.

[Mexicouger]

Focus on your own shit.

My source is released dumbass

I obviously meant stop worrying about other people and focus on your own work.

Well it sounded like an attack to Primepsp. It took me a week to get the source out, So that is where the assumption came into play

[scar3crow]

Please keep 1on1 exchanges which branch from the original topic to private messages. Forums are a public discussion.

[Downsider]

Please keep 1on1 exchanges which branch from the original topic to private messages. Forums are a public discussion.

You could've PM'd that to us. It's a 2on1 exchange, you know.

[Spirit]

Downsider, stop worrying about other people and focus on your own work.

The linked mod is violation id's copyright, so they probably don't care about the GPL either...