InsideQC Forums

In this thread the idea has been put forth by a specific individual advocating:

1) Violating Valve's copyright.
2) Violating Valve's license agreement.

People proposing such ideas are exactly the kind of people that are:

A) Why companies have lawyers
B) Why copyright laws exist and why license agreements exist
C) The kind of people who receive legal letters in the mail and or get sued.

toneddu2000 wrote:It only takes to contact Valve, explain the porting intention and wait for a reply.

Their reply will be no.

They will not be spending $10,000 in legal fees to draft up a special agreement just for some random dude (they've never even heard of) that emails them.

Do you think Valve --- a company with untold TENS of million of unit sales and has been popular ever since Half Life in 1998 so that's 12 years --- you think they have never received such an email in the past?

Where are these projects that received such a special exemption or custom license?

Don't forget there was a HL2 source code leak that may have included Goldsrc code, so there's a possible chance this engine could be using a portion of it, allegedly "written from scratch"

Baker wrote: 1) Violating Valve's copyright.
2) Violating Valve's license agreement.

Are you serious? Have you even read Valves licence agreement? Reverse engineering is not copyright violation, and it is intellectually lazy to suggest otherwise. Nor did I propose violating Valves licence agreement. Asserting otherwise is ridiculous.

Valve released the SDK with the intention of encouraging modification of their software. Which is entirely what Xash3d is. A modification of their SDK, which requires a licensed version of Half-life to run. It contains code poached from Quake. That is it. The fact that they're blatantly breaking the GPL (the real issue here) is besides the point.

Their reply will be no.

They will not be spending $10,000 in legal fees to draft up a special agreement just for some random dude (they've never even heard of) that emails them.

Do you think Valve --- a company with untold TENS of million of unit sales and has been popular ever since Half Life in 1998 so that's 12 years --- you think they have never received such an email in the past?

Where are these projects that received such a special exemption or custom license?

Yes. There are projects that have received special exemptions. See http://blackmesasource.com/, which strongly borrows (steals?) from Valves copyright. It happens all the time. This is the nature of community driven modifications and expansion packs. I'm not even arguing here in favor of the PSP port, which incidentally I consider completely mentally retarded. If there is a chance that Valve could consider Xash3d in violation -entirely upto Valves discretion at this point, they must contact Valve and officially receive a CND notice or otherwise. A simple email to Gabe Newell is all it takes.

If Valve OK's it, they should do a through code audit and gut all GPLed Quake code out.

Or, alternatively, if Valve takes the nay stance and does CND, the project should gut all SDK code from the engine, and exist as a reverse engineering job based on top of Quake. Entirely legal.

Unfortunately, it is likely that neither of these things will happen.

black mesa is sponsored by valve last i heard so heh... besides that its going to be a free expansion for those who allready own half-life.
valve licensed the quake code many years back im no lawyer so im not into what rights that give them but i doubt they would go farther than what ID's license agreement states (just in case they licensed it before it went opensource).
if in doubt ask ID and hear there take on it.

DolphinsOfCydonia wrote:

Baker wrote: 1) Violating Valve's copyright.
2) Violating Valve's license agreement.

Are you serious? Have you even read Valves licence agreement? Reverse engineering is not copyright violation, and it is intellectually lazy to suggest otherwise. Nor did I propose violating Valves licence agreement. Asserting otherwise is ridiculous.

Valve released the SDK with the intention of encouraging modification of their software. Which is entirely what Xash3d is. A modification of their SDK, which requires a licensed version of Half-life to run. It contains code poached from Quake. That is it. The fact that they're blatantly breaking the GPL (the real issue here) is besides the point.

1) Valve licensed the Quake (and Quake2) engine from id before such engines were released as GPL. Also, id reserved the right to sell separated licenses for those willing to keep their engine changes closed. Thus, they're not breaking GPL;
2) Valve has a history of being, well, very protective regarding the use of their IP's. Not only regarding source code, but characters, artwork and even file formats (and reverse engineering it from scratch won't make difference in a court, BTW - see this example.). They only make concessions when you are working in mods using and directly related to their games. Any attempt of mixing, say, Half Life assets with other company' IP is passive of a C&D order.

EDIT: for mispelling and added a couple observations.

The EULA with Valve is quite explicit:

Whereas, Licensee wishes to develop a modified game running only on the Half-Life engine (a "Mod") for free distribution in object code form only to licensed end users of Half-Life

These are the basic conditions you must meet. If you're not running on the HL engine and only on the HL engine, you are in breach. If you distribute source, you are in breach. If it can be used without having a HL install, you are in breach. You must meet all 3. It's not good enough to meet 1 or 2 and kinda handwave the other(s), you must meet all 3.

The GPL arguments are cute, but they're of borderline relevance here. Your right is to "use, reproduce and modify the SDK in source code form, solely to develop a Mod" and to "reproduce, distribute and license the Mod in object code form, solely to licensed end users of Half-Life, without charge" (and "a Mod" is defined in the second sentence after the preamble). You click the "I Agree" button when you install the SDK so you accept those terms and you don't have a leg to stand on if you go outside of them. You also accept to be bound by the laws of the State of Washington in your use of the SDK. The only argument you could make would be that the EULA itself was illegal or unenforcable, but nothing else would wash.

frag.machine wrote: 1) Valve licensed the Quake (and Quake2) engine from id before such engines were released as GPL. Also, id reserved the right to sell separated licenses for those willing to keep their engine changes closed. Thus, they're not breaking GPL;

It is Xash3d who is violating GPL.

Eh. It's probably not even that much SDK code. There are already open source alternatives. Gut the crap out and be done with it.

How are they maintaining netcode compatibility with real clients? Is that a proper reverse engineering job or is it nabbed from other leaks?

[Unnecessary analysis ...]

An honest and meaningful conversation with someone who willfully chooses to live in "assumption land", in fact prefers to live there, is not possible.

I read the Mod DB page marketing at face value.
http://www.moddb.com/engines/xash3d-engine

I actually just took the time to download the source now. It's riddled with Valve code, everywhere. This is awful.

DolphinsOfCydonia wrote:I actually just took the time to download the source now. It's riddled with Valve code, everywhere.

That's what everyone has been saying. Most of the participants have heard of this engine before.

DolphinsOfCydonia wrote:I actually just took the time to download the source now. It's riddled with Valve code, everywhere. This is awful.

Yep.

You have pointed out something that I think 3 or 4 in this thread may have forgot about, that project portrays itself in manner that implies ethics.

And that is what is seen when visiting the page. (The project in fact may have ethical intentions, but is using unethical methods for sure.)

Most of us in this thread are engine coders and the first thing we do is download the source and look through files, often as an act of curiosity and perhaps equally often as an act of skepticism. I often download the source to see if it really is available

It is noteworthy that not everyone does this as a first instinct. I rarely or never bothered to download source code as the "first thing I do" before I started engine coding, I mean I didn't need or have interest in the source code so why would I ...

You should see the lost cause of game projects that use it

http://www.moddb.com/games/quartal
http://www.moddb.com/engines/xash3d-engine

It's funny quartal wants this on the psp so bad yet don't understand the whole win32 native dll thing.

This engine sounds almost like GOLK all over again.

As a side point, if the HL SDK's EULA prohibits mod makers from releasing their source, then why has Spirit of Half-Life (http://www.moddb.com/mods/spirit-of-half-life) had its source available for several years? Are they in violation?

probably... looks like a modified half-life sdk.