Duke4.net Forums: The Merit of Open Source - Duke4.net Forums

Jump to content

Hide message Show message
Welcome to the Duke4.net Forums!

Register an account now to get access to all board features. After you've registered and logged in, you'll be able to create topics, post replies, send and receive private messages, disable the viewing of ads and more!

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Merit of Open Source  "Split from News & Releases"

User is offline   Tiddalick 

  • 4

#1

View PostKilles, on 20 November 2017 - 04:17 AM, said:

I must agree sound is not such a priority compared to MP, but M210 might not have much motivation / too big a project to work on MP alone.

I guess though BloodGDX is now well known across blood/build communities and if someone with the know how and motivation to help with MP were around they would of announced themselves by now :/


Well, no point reinventing the wheel.
Blood uses the Build engine afterall, so its likely that the work done by the guys with EDuke32 will show what has to be done.

This goes to the heart of what TerminX, Hendricks266 and others have been saying on opening this project up (i.e. Open Source), as this would allow it to happen faster.

I realise that M210 wants to work on this himself, but I do hope that eventually he opens up the project so others can help and learn from what he has found.
If blood is to live another 20 years, then this really should go Open source at some stage.
0

User is offline   Hendricks266 

  • EDuke32 Senior Developer
  • 5,651

  #2

I can't see BloodGDX going open source because it is obfuscated to hide the fact it is based on the stolen code from February 1996.

I would not mind being proven wrong.
0

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#3

View PostHendricks266, on 20 November 2017 - 05:49 AM, said:

I can't see BloodGDX going open source because it is obfuscated to hide the fact it is based on the stolen code from February 1996.

I would not mind being proven wrong.

There is a saying in law that goes "ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat": "the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies."

But yeah, going open source would be nice. If I remember correctly M210 said he'll decide on that once the project is finished.

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 07:04 AM

-1

User is offline   Hendricks266 

  • EDuke32 Senior Developer
  • 5,651

  #4

View PostZaxx, on 20 November 2017 - 07:03 AM, said:

There is a saying in law that goes "ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat": "the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies."

I'm speaking of the "can't see" part. BloodGDX being based on alpha source has already been confirmed.
0

User is offline   J432 

  • 4

#5

That strange feeling of déjà vu... BTW, Hendricks, what is an estimated date of release of your open source port of Blood?

This post has been edited by J432: 20 November 2017 - 07:14 AM

-1

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#6

View PostHendricks266, on 20 November 2017 - 07:04 AM, said:

I'm speaking of the "can't see" part. BloodGDX being based on alpha source has already been confirmed.

Oh, I'm sure GT Interactive, Monolith and Ken Silverman all feel the pain now that someone lifted stuff from their 20 years old top of the line tech. :D

If it's proven and out in the open then I think the fact that nothing happened to the project basically says "it's okay now" but of course everyone is free to make their own port without using up anything from the code that's out there. I like to see this thing from the user perspective though.

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 07:11 AM

0

User is online   Phredreeke 

  • 57

#7

Honestly, even if M210 keeps BloodGDX closed source I would love to see him write a specification of what the code does (think Martin Korth's NO$ emulators and his FullSNES/GBATek documentation)
0

User is offline   Manhs 

  • 6

#8

People are allowed to do what they want with their projects, releasing the code or not even if it could be more cool.
Maybe when v1 and mp will be done because the project is not even finished. (but yeah, we talked about that yet i think :unsure: )

This post has been edited by Manhs: 20 November 2017 - 07:13 AM

0

User is offline   Hendricks266 

  • EDuke32 Senior Developer
  • 5,651

  #9

View PostJ432, on 20 November 2017 - 07:08 AM, said:

That strange feeling of déjà vu...

>M210
>J432

Indeed.
0

User is offline   J432 

  • 4

#10

View PostHendricks266, on 20 November 2017 - 07:21 AM, said:

>M210
>J432

Indeed.


You forgot to reply about that date.

This post has been edited by J432: 20 November 2017 - 07:29 AM

0

User is online   Phredreeke 

  • 57

#11

Hendricks, will your port have multiplayer?
0

User is offline   Hendricks266 

  • EDuke32 Senior Developer
  • 5,651

  #12

View PostPhredreeke, on 20 November 2017 - 07:30 AM, said:

Hendricks, will your port have multiplayer?

It depends how well the surgical reattachment works of that part of the game-engine bindings to the mmulti code after JonoF, TX, and co.'s changes over the years. Striker lent me a hand by porting OldMP's mmulti code to the EDuke32 upstream.
0

User is offline   TheZombieKiller 

  • 285

#13

View PostZaxx, on 20 November 2017 - 07:09 AM, said:

Oh, I'm sure GT Interactive, Monolith and Ken Silverman all feel the pain now that someone lifted stuff from their 20 years old top of the line tech. :D

If it's proven and out in the open then I think the fact that nothing happened to the project basically says "it's okay now" but of course everyone is free to make their own port without using up anything from the code that's out there. I like to see this thing from the user perspective though.

If this is what you genuinely believe, you're a fool. It'd be nice if that was how things worked, but unfortunately that is not the case.

View PostManhs, on 20 November 2017 - 07:12 AM, said:

People are allowed to do what they want with their projects, releasing the code or not even if it could be more cool.
Maybe when v1 and mp will be done because the project is not even finished. (but yeah, we talked about that yet i think :unsure: )

I take it you've never heard of software licenses. Or copyright. Or the law.

I understand that you're all happy about there finally being a Blood port, but don't use that as an excuse to remain ignorant to the legal ramifications of the current situation.

Avatar by 88alice/Kurashiki
1

User is offline   Manhs 

  • 6

#14

View PostTheZombieKiller, on 20 November 2017 - 08:04 AM, said:

If this is what you genuinely believe, you're a fool. It'd be nice if that was how things worked, but unfortunately that is not the case.


I take it you've never heard of software licenses. Or copyright. Or the law.

I understand that you're all happy about there finally being a Blood port, but don't use that as an excuse to remain ignorant to the legal ramifications of the current situation.


More details?
I know just about BLOOD copyrights where Atari have the sales rights and Warner Games has the rights to make a new game (apprently, it's the thing) so what's the point?
Is there an issue with Eduke32? I didnt follow what happened since a while.

This angriness here is so depressing...

This post has been edited by Manhs: 20 November 2017 - 09:17 AM

0

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#15

View PostTheZombieKiller, on 20 November 2017 - 08:04 AM, said:

If this is what you genuinely believe, you're a fool.

Yes, I genuinely believe that a publisher the size of WB Games (or Atari but we don't care about Atari since they don't have the IP and they barely even exist anymore) would not pursue legal process for a breach of copyright this insignificant in magnitude in the case of an IP that is dead as a rock for two decades now. The only place where Blood is worth a damn for them is in their IP portfolio so they'll never let go of it but other than that they don't care.

Hell, if two of us get upset when they send the DMCA and we won't buy the next Mortal Kombat they already lost more money than the IP's worth.

Edit: The thing is: abandonware exists even if it doesn't exist in the legal sense. There are situations when even though you could face a legal problem you don't face it because the party that holds the cards for that simply doesn't care or views your activity as a positive thing. A few years ago some guy reverse-engineered the shit out of Jordan Mechner's original Prince of Persia and made a port that runs natively on Windows, has native controller support etc. When Mechner, the IP holder for Prince of Persia (before someone asks: no, Ubisoft doesn't have the IP) heard about the thing he was like "well, that's cool" and retweeted it even though it was a clear breach of his IP rights. Stuff like this happens sometimes and the only way to test this is basically by trying. I really don't think the discussion needs armchair lawyers until we see some actual activity from WB.

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 09:50 AM

0

User is offline   Forge 

  • 5,305

#16

View PostZaxx, on 20 November 2017 - 09:23 AM, said:

Yes, I genuinely believe that a publisher the size of WB Games (or Atari but we don't care about Atari since they don't have the IP and they barely even exist anymore) would not pursue legal process for a breach of copyright this insignificant in magnitude in the case of an IP that is dead as a rock for two decades now. The only place where Blood is worth a damn for them is in their IP portfolio so they'll never let go of it but other than that they don't care.

Broad assumptions about what greedy asshats with a team of lawyers will or will not do.

People keep saying the "blood community" is excited about this port and making it popular - then people turn around and say, "Oh that corporation won't notice or care about their old property."

It's fun to sit on the fence and spout altruisms when it's not you taking the risks.
0

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#17

View PostForge, on 20 November 2017 - 09:51 AM, said:

Broad assumptions about what greedy asshats with a team of lawyers will or will not do.

But that's my whole reasoning: their greediness. If there was money to make here they'd act... but there's no money to make here, only to lose a bit on some legal nonsense. Nobody's gonna be like "oh fuck, Justice League is flopping, we have to save the company, send a DMCA to the dev of BloodGDX, Jeff!"

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 10:04 AM

0

User is offline   Forge 

  • 5,305

#18

View PostZaxx, on 20 November 2017 - 09:56 AM, said:

But that's my whole reasoning: their greediness. If there was money to make here they'd act... but there's no money to make here, only to lose a bit on some legal nonsense.

more assumptions about the motive of greedy people.
some don't give a fuck about their stuff, but they don't want anyone else to have it either.

I'm sure you own stuff you haven't used in a long time, years even, but it's still yours and you aren't going to let just anybody walk into your place and take it, or throw it in the trash.

You shouldn't make assumptions about people's/corporation's motives - and that blood i.p. has been sought after for quite some time now. Yet they still have their greedy meat-hooks clamped on to it and refuse to let it go without some exorbitant price attached to it.

This post has been edited by Forge: 20 November 2017 - 10:07 AM

0

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#19

View PostForge, on 20 November 2017 - 10:06 AM, said:

You shouldn't make assumptions about people's/corporation's motives - and that blood i.p. has been sought after for quite some time now, Yet they still have their greedy meat-hooks clamped on to it and refuse to let it go without some exorbitant price attached to it.

How was the Blood IP sought after? When Devolver asked WB about the price and their reply was some unrealistically high number? That's IP protection in practice, they don't want to sell it because companies hold onto their IPs if there is no crisis, that's what they do.

Or you mean Jace Hall's teases? Yeah, at this point you can be sure that project is dead, the esports business is boomin' over there again.

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 10:12 AM

0

User is offline   Forge 

  • 5,305

#20

If they didn't care about their i.p., then the source code would have been released quite some time ago.

But it's very noble of you to facelessly shout advice for someone else to take all the risks and see how far the envelope can be pushed before the owner takes notice.
0

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#21

View PostForge, on 20 November 2017 - 10:25 AM, said:

If they didn't care about their i.p., then the source code would have been released quite some time ago.

Releasing a source code needs caring too, it's not exactly something you can do with spending zero money on it.

Quote

But it's very noble of you to facelessly shout advice for someone else to take all the risks and see how far the envelope can be pushed before the owner takes notice.

You say this like it was me who asked M210 to make a source port. :D

As for advice to M210, I only have one: never ask money for it and never specify what you ask donations for. Don't say stuff like "support my work and BloodGDX can be better". :)

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 10:43 AM

0

User is offline   axl 

  • 92

#22

Not trying to offend anyone, but can't we move these discussions to another thread?

I have no problems with these discussions, but I'm here to see progress and news on BloodGDX ;)
0

User is offline   Forge 

  • 5,305

#23

View PostZaxx, on 20 November 2017 - 10:36 AM, said:

You say this like it was me who asked M210 to make a source port. :D

You encouraged the release of the port code - which may, or may not include allegedly i.p. owned source code. All for the purpose of advancing the port for more people to work on it and get more features.
Don't backtrack now, own your selfish motives.
0

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#24

View PostForge, on 20 November 2017 - 10:52 AM, said:

You encouraged the release of the port code - which may, or may not include allegedly i.p. owned source code. All for the purpose of advancing the port for more people to work on it and get more features.
Don't backtrack now, own your selfish motives.

What? :D All I said was "it would be nice to go open source" and yes, that would be nice but it's not up to me to decide if that's a risk or not. I don't think it is though, at least in the case where there are no rats in the community who start acting like IP lawyers and notify everyone and their mothers about a potential copyright breach. I'm not thinking anyone here could do that, just saying.

"Own your selfish motives." :D Man, the theatricality is strong in this one.

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 12:14 PM

0

User is offline   Wookiestick 

  • 2

#25

I would just hope that if M210 has a shift in priorities for whatever reason, and can't continue working on BloodGDX, that he would release the source. Just putting my 2 bits in.
1

User is online   Zaxx 

  • 26

#26

View PostWookiestick, on 20 November 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

I would just hope that if M210 has a shift in priorities for whatever reason, and can't continue working on BloodGDX, that he would release the source. Just putting my 2 bits in.

I already liked your comment when I saw the QotSE avatar but I agree with the actual contents of it too. :D The future of a source port is quite important.

This post has been edited by Zaxx: 20 November 2017 - 02:23 PM

0

User is offline   Manhs 

  • 6

#27

I still don't know the issue with the copyrights, is there an issue with the eduke32 team code about it?
I play with emulation when i don't have the choice to play an old game except if i can buy it and actually, we have to buy BLOOD to play it with BloodGDX.
I don't know much details about the conditions of the IP of BLOOD but i would want know what is the issue between the copyrights of the IP and BloodGDX.

maybe eduke32 team are making a port secretly....some things are not said <_<
I said that but it's weird. I want just know, is it about the problem of the code used by M210 who is from eduke32?
Is he gonna release his sourcecode since some "people" seem to have nice intentions for him? It's not gonna work :/

This post has been edited by Manhs: 20 November 2017 - 03:31 PM

0

User is online   Phredreeke 

  • 57

#28

Basically, since there's no official Blood source code release M210 is decompiling the original Blood binary and generate the equivalent Java code. Hence BloodGDX still contains Monolith's copyrighted code.
AFAIK there's no issue with eduke32 as long as he does not touch the GPL licensed parts of it.
0

User is offline   Tiddalick 

  • 4

#29

View PostPhredreeke, on 20 November 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

Basically, since there's no official Blood source code release M210 is decompiling the original Blood binary and generate the equivalent Java code. Hence BloodGDX still contains Monolith's copyrighted code.
AFAIK there's no issue with eduke32 as long as he does not touch the GPL licensed parts of it.


I'm curious as to the 'correct' legal definition here.

If decompilation cannot yield the exact code that created it (as all things like comments, etc are lost and there are many ways to make the same function) then can you really be said to 'copy' the code through this action.

Just curious what programmers see as fair game and what is legally allowed.
0

User is online   Phredreeke 

  • 57

#30

Sharing MP3s of commercial CDs is still illegal despite not being perfect copies.
1

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic


All copyrights and trademarks are property of their respective owners. Yes, our forum uses cookies. © 2017 Voidpoint, LLC

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options