[mrjoshua]

how is eduke32 under both a free and a nonfree license. Is there a linking exception I do not know about in the header files?

BUILD engine technology originally created by Ken Silverman, non-GPL rendering and engine technology used in EDuke32 available under BUILDLIC.

GNU GPL with Linking Exception

This software is licensed under the GNU General Public License version 2 (GPLv2) (or any later version) as published by the Free Software Foundation, with the following exception:

As a special exception, you may link this software with nongpl rendering and engine tech by ken silverman and distribute the resulting executable under terms of your choice, provided that you also meet the terms and conditions of the buildlic. This exception applies only to the code provided by eduke32.

If you modify this software, you may extend this exception to your version of the software, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not wish to extend this exception, remove this exception statement from your version.

Notes:
Replace GPLvX with the version of the GPL you're using (e.g., GPLv2 or GPLv3).
Specify the libraries or exceptions clearly and precisely to avoid confusion.
Consider consulting a legal professional to ensure the exception fits your project's needs without introducing conflicts.

[gibfrag]

Non-GPL rendering and BUILD engine technology originally created by Ken Silverman used in EDuke32 is available under BUILDLIC, the nonfree license. The rest of EDuke32 is under the GNU GPL, the free license. It's a dual license I assume because the BUILD engine itself is licensed.

[mrjoshua]

DNSkill, on 21 November 2024 - 06:09 PM, said:

Non-GPL rendering and BUILD engine technology originally created by Ken Silverman used in EDuke32 is available under BUILDLIC, the nonfree license. The rest of EDuke32 is under the GNU GPL, the free license. It's a dual license I assume because the BUILD engine itself is licensed.

You're absolutely correct that the BUILD engine and EDuke32 operate under distinct licensing frameworks, and this dual setup exists because of the licensing terms governing the BUILD engine's original code.

BUILD engine: Originally developed by Ken Silverman, the BUILD engine is available under the "BUILDLIC" license, which is not a free license as defined by the Free Software Foundation (FSF). This means that while you can use and distribute the BUILD engine code under its terms, it doesn't afford the freedoms guaranteed by licenses like the GPL (e.g., modification and redistribution under the same terms).

EDuke32: The enhancements and modifications contributed by the EDuke32 team to create a more modern and advanced version of Duke Nukem 3D are licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), a free software license that ensures users' freedoms to run, modify, and distribute the software.

This dual-licensing structure emerges because the EDuke32 project integrates and depends on the BUILD engine, which retains its original BUILDLIC licensing terms. However, the EDuke32-specific code is freely licensed under the GPL.

Why This Matters
The dual licensing means that:

Freedom to Use EDuke32: While EDuke32’s modifications and new code are GPL, the inclusion of the BUILD engine under BUILDLIC places restrictions on how the software can be used and redistributed as a whole.

Compliance: If you redistribute EDuke32, you must comply with both the GPL (for the EDuke32 code) and the BUILDLIC (for the BUILD engine). These two licenses coexist, but the BUILD engine’s nonfree license imposes constraints that prevent the entire project from being considered fully free software.

Modification and Redistribution: Any modifications to the BUILD engine code would need to comply with the BUILDLIC license, and such modifications could not be re-licensed under the GPL.

The dual-licensing approach is a pragmatic way to balance legacy code with modern open-source development, though it does create a hybrid legal structure that users and developers need to navigate carefully.

[Reaper_Man]

ChatGPT?

[Danukem]

Could be, but the user has had an account here for 9 years. Maybe the old account got hacked.

[MrFlibble]

Danukem, on 23 November 2024 - 11:47 AM, said:

Maybe the old account got hacked.

That very definitely does happen once in a while, even with legit users. However, this one does not seem to have posted anything in those 9 years, so more likely a "sleeper" spam account? These can be dormant for years, I suspect that they might even be sold as a commodity in the meantime to prospective spammers.

[gibfrag]

I wonder if the username is a reference to Lethal Weapon.