What Open Source implies

aloys · **Posted:** Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:51 pm

There are many mis-conceptions about what Uru going 'Open Source' means; I am not an expert on the subject, and there are many questions that only Cyan can answer, but with some minimal knowledge of open source models and reading between the lines of the announcement there are a couple things that can be cleared.

Because Uru becomes 'Open Source' doesn't mean we can do anything with it.
We may, but again we may not. In particular, related to new content: anything we add to the game (new Ages, clothes etc) is still subject to the usual legal regulations and copyrights issues, and we can't add anything without asking Cyan approval first. (unless they suddenly change the process they've had for 15 years now) Also, we may (or may not) be subject to RAWA's guidelines for new content, or other systems (FCALs etc).. This is especially true regarding content that isn't originally part of Uru; so adding Ages from other games to Uru may not be possible; and bringing an army of Jedi Hobbits to slaughter the Teledahn mushrooms may not be a good idea either. (well, it should be fun, but not from a copyright point of view)

Cyan releases the code, not the content.
The announcement talks about releasing source code, not the source for the 3D/Textures/sound assets. There's no mention of releasing the original Cyan Ages 3DS Max files. We will get the Ages from Cyan's data server (or from our own Uru version if it's compatible) but the Plasma toolset for 3DS Max, but not the 3DS Max files themselves. (If we're lucky they might release a single Age for us to use as an example; that'd be useful but it's just wishfull thinking at this point.)

Also, all Open source projects are attached to a license that we need to agree to when adding to or modifying the project (or to be more precise that's when we redistribute the modifications). It specifies in great details what is and isn't possible for the project. What license Cyan choses will determine in part what is possible for MORE (argh, we really need a new official name). But we getting a little too much into the technical details here.

All this remains a little vague for now, and hopefully Cyan will clear things up soon, but for now there are many people assuming things about the future that may not be possible; so no need to get false hopes. If Uru has taught us one thing it is to manage our expectations.

----
A more in-depth look at Open Source implications can be found on Wikipedia.

Rusty_Russell · **Posted:** Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:28 pm

Hi, Aloys. I've found something better.

http://www.mystonline.com/forums/viewto ... 530#278530

BAD · **Joined:** Tue May 09, 2006 2:10 am **Posts:** 372

It's important to note that some of those licenses are free use, which means you can edit the wording of the license to reflect what you want.

So an open source agreement can be tweaked to fit what you want it to specify as conditions for people to distribute the data, or whatever is released that uses said data.

ddfreyne · **Posted:** Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:25 pm

Quote:

It's important to note that some of those licenses are free use, which means you can edit the wording of the license to reflect what you want.

So an open source agreement can be tweaked to fit what you want it to specify as conditions for people to distribute the data, or whatever is released that uses said data.

I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean that you can change the text in licences Cyan has granted you, then you're quite mistaken. If, on the other hand, you are saying that Cyan is free to use an existing licence as a basis (GPL, BSD, or anything else) and change that, you're correct. There is a very important difference between these two interpretations.

Al'Kaera · **Posted:** Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:58 pm

That which Cyan hands off into the trust and care of the community is what I will remain here to serve and protect.

Edited to remove my nose from the game legal/design thrashing. Please continue.

Rusty_Russell · **Posted:** Sun Dec 14, 2008 10:02 pm

Quote:

We realize that this could turn UruLive into the "wild west"

I quote from the original announcement again.

And this too.

http://www.mystonline.com/forums/viewto ... 530#278530

aloys · **Posted:** Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 am

Hah, I missed that post by Denis. (too many posts to read those last two days

)

ddfreyne wrote:

Uru being open-source means anyone can do pretty much whatever they want without Cyan's approval, Frisky Badger

I'm sure he means whithin the usual legal constraints. We won't be able to actually do *anything*. Copyrights and IP regulations still apply whatever the Open Source license used. (If only from IP created before MORE -- again, for instance: adding Myst Island to Uru whithout Cyan approval? I don't think so.)
As for the whole 'skipping FCALs & Cyan approval' thing; that's not how I read the announcement; and I see many people waving this as a fact; which I don't understand. I can't wait until Cyan officially clear things up. (not to dimish Denis' participation, but we need to all be on the same page

)
But yeah, even within those restrictions it could still be the wild west.

(edit: fixed messy quote tags)

BAD · **Joined:** Tue May 09, 2006 2:10 am **Posts:** 372

ddfreyne wrote:

Quote:

It's important to note that some of those licenses are free use, which means you can edit the wording of the license to reflect what you want.

So an open source agreement can be tweaked to fit what you want it to specify as conditions for people to distribute the data, or whatever is released that uses said data.

I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean that you can change the text in licences Cyan has granted you, then you're quite mistaken. If, on the other hand, you are saying that Cyan is free to use an existing licence as a basis (GPL, BSD, or anything else) and change that, you're correct. There is a very important difference between these two interpretations.

Perhaps I didn't word that so well. Yes I did indeed mean that Cyan will probably adopt a GPL or BSD, and then rewrite it a bit to fit what they want, THEN release everything. They said it would be in stages. So I think they want to put their toe in the water before they jump in.

Rusty_Russell · **Posted:** Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:20 am

Quote:

I can't wait until Cyan officially clear things up.

I agree. I've added this to Lynnutte's list of questions for Cyan.

belford · **Joined:** Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:01 pm **Posts:** 1890

I too am waiting to see exactly how Cyan phrases things. Personally, I don't expect a hedging "Oh, we say open-source but really we're keeping tight control of the result" license. Why would they bother? If Cyan is so strapped for time, how could they expect to play guardian?

But let me answer the literal question of this thread:

Open Source implies trust.

If this really happens, then Cyan trusts us (not just "you and me", but everybody) with their project. And then we *have* to trust each other. It will be too late to beg for someone to take control back. Whatever nightmare you have of *the wrong people* using Uru for *the wrong thing*, you'll have to set it aside. You won't have a magic button to push to make it go away. There is no "Daddy, fix it". Nobody will. All you will have is the power to do something greater, more powerful, better organized.

We joke about "benevolent dictators" on open-source projects. (I see that as a title of another thread.) I *am* a benevolent dictator of a couple of projects. But it's a joke because there is no dictation; only leadership.

Open Source implies that you grow up and take responsibility for making better what is important to you.

belford · **Joined:** Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:01 pm **Posts:** 1890

(People familiar with my open-source projects are now saying "Yeah, so why don't you take responsibility and start fixing the *ten-year-old bugs* on your list?" Guilty.)

What Open Source implies

Who is online