[Scummvm-devel] ScummVM License

[Thierry Crozat]

Oh, and what about ResidualVM (and other GPLv2 project if any) that already
uses some ScummVM code? Does that forces them to relicense to GPLv3 as well?

On 1 February 2016 at 12:25, Thierry Crozat <criezy at scummvm.org> wrote:

> Another benefit of GPLv3 we saw in recent discussions (related to the
> licensing FAQ wiki page) is that, if I remember correctly, it clarifies the
> legal status of providing source code on a web site (as opposed to a
> physical media) for companies using ScummVM to sell commercial games and
> not providing the source code in the game package.
>
> That being said I don't really know yet what to think about the main
> drawback you mention (GPLv2 project wanting to use part of the ScummVM
> code). My initial thought was that it looks like a serious drawback. Is
> dual licensing (or part or all) of the code base a possibility? Can it be
> decided at a laterstage after the license upgrading (I assume that if
> code becomes licensed under GPLv3+, adding back GPLv2 might be an issue)?
>
> On 1 February 2016 at 11:10, Eugene Sandulenko <sev at scummvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Team,
>>
>> I would like to raise a question of upgrading ScummVM to GPLv3+ license.
>>
>> It was long believed that because of difficulties or impossibility to
>> connect with some of the code contributors, we have no way to upgrade to
>> GPLv3+.
>>
>> However, yesterday I had a chance to ask this question directly to
>> Richard Stallman on FOSS (Strangerke and md5 were with me), and he
>> explained, that GPLv2+ (which ScummVM is currently licensed under)
>> perfectly allows so-called "autoupgrade."
>>
>> Why I'd like to upgrade.
>>
>> 1. There is certain software, particularly RetroArch's shader scalers
>> which I'd like to use. I spoke to them last year, they kind of
>> dual-licensed portions under GPLv2, but since that that specific branch was
>> deleted from their repository on GitHub, so there are no traceable signs of
>> that agreement.
>>
>> 2. The difference between GPLv2 and v3 is in preventing so-called
>> TiVoisation when consistency checks on the platform prohibit any binary
>> modifications. This may potentially touch us in the future, e.g. somebody
>> could prevent ScummVM from running anything but some specific game on some
>> platform, restricting our freedom (yes, it's theoretical exercise, but
>> still). The second difference doesn't touch us as it deals with patents,
>> but I hardly imagine that we may even consider patenting something related
>> to ScummVM.
>>
>> Thus, the primary goal is #1. #2 is informative.
>>
>> The major (and only to my knowledge) drawback is that we will effectively
>> prevent GPLv2 projects to reuse our code. Say, DOSBox or Linux will have to
>> upgrade too if they want to build-in portions of ScummVM.
>>
>> So, thoughts? Complains?
>>
>>
>> Eugene
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
>> APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
>> Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
>> Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
>> _______________________________________________
>> Scummvm-devel mailing list
>> Scummvm-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scummvm-devel
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.scummvm.org/pipermail/scummvm-devel/attachments/20160201/2410d877/attachment.html>