Right, but the game doesn't exist. Someone has to make it.
With the editors also being free software this isn't a problem. You can
ignore the original games and just use the engine/editor to make an entirely
new and wholly original games...
But why exclude a free software engine if it just so happens it can be used
as a drop-in replacement for a non-free one if you use assets from an old
game?
It would make some sence if that was all you could do with it, but in the
case of my two examples this is not the case.
But why exclude a free software engine if it just so happens it can be used
as a drop-in replacement for a non-free one if you use assets from an old
game?
It would make some since if that was all you could do with it, but in the
case of my two examples this is not the case.
LibreGameWiki is designed to help people find games to play, not to help game
developers find engines to use. The latter purpose would probably be better
served in a place like freegamedev.net.
You already identified another word that isn't so easily confused with work
[1], so there is no point in changing my message since you can do it
mentally. I intentionally used the same word for [1] and [3] with annotations
(the ones between square brackets) so as to make it clear that the
This is misleading. Debian “main” repository includes software which is
proprietary (according to the FSF) including some under the Artistic License
1.0. Therefore not all software from Debian main “is definitely ok” in
the sense of being suitable for a fully free distribution that uses the
When arguments or messages are ignored or can't be understood by one of the
speakers it is of no use to continue discussing
Oh, so you simply give up? And on top of that is my fault?
you insist in conflating information (a work [1], in the terminology above)
with its physical
Removed Red Eclipse from the list.
Because if some one has to profit from a work. Isn't the author the one that
deserves that right? He is the one who made the effort to produce the product
after all.
It is true that the Debian main repo includes packages with Artistic License
1.
In fact I went to read the license and then I went to check each package that
I have installed on my computer (Debian 8) with the command grep -i
'^License:.*Artistic' /usr/share/doc/*/copyright
Every installed
What about Exult and OpenMW? they have their own editors you could make 100%
libre games with.
As long as you agree that non-commercial sharing must not be forbidden, you
can have sites (or P2P networks) where copies of the digital work are
available at no price. That is financially unbeatable. Prohibiting
non-commercial sharing does not change that fact.
In a pay what ever you
There are reasons she could want to do that. I could cite the famous artist
Nina Paley. But Gwenn Seemel is closer to a sculptor:
http://www.gwennseemel.com/index.php/copyright/
Thanks for the links, I'll take them a look for what's rest of Sunday.
Anyway, the sculptor *can* allow
For instance, Popcorn time is more convenient than using a Web browser and
a regular BitTorrent client (that downloads the pieces in any order) or than
renting a DVD in a local store.
I don't think popcorn time is a good example. Popcorn time offer movies
gratis (non-commercial) and
Because it's not your place to tell me what I can do with my property.
Is that so? Let's take a look at your true actions, so then we can see if
you're truly following what you say. Your web page for example:
https://onpon4.github.io/
If we apply what you said, then the content of your
I'm sure a lot of the products I use were made, designed, or distributed by
people who did unethical things. That doesn't mean I have to reject the
products.
But why do you think is unethical? I don't understand why you consider
restricting commercial use of my work without my permission
I don't understand why you consider restricting commercial use of my work
without my permission something unethical.
Because it's not your place to tell me what I can do with my property.
Nabisco sells chocolate chip cookies (Chips Ahoy). It is my right to do the
same with my own chocolate
danieru: You are conflating 3 separate concepts: [1] the abstract concept of
a work, like “The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote of La Mancha”, [2] its
physical representation (an exemplar of this work as found in most libraries)
and [3] “work” as the action of making effort to build something
nicolasm...@tutanota.com wrote:
Hi all! I've imported a list of games that might be mistakenly seen as
libre, but are not. Have a peek:
https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/rejected-games-list
This list claims that Wizard of Wor HTML5 has No license information on
the SF.net page but on
I couldn't truly understand your message. Could you change [1], [2] and [3]
with different words? Effort instead of [3] for instance.
Look back a few messages, because I was very careful with my wording here.
I said that it is unethical to deny people the four freedoms, for all works.
Note that I do not do so. All of the licenses I use are libre software and
libre culture licenses.
Now that have a lot more sense to me
Look back a few messages, because I was very careful with my wording here. I
said that it is unethical to deny people the four freedoms, for all works.
Note that I do not do so. All of the licenses I use are libre software and
libre culture licenses.
If my copy of Pacewar by onpon4 was my
I already know that your opinion on copyright and artistic works is a
carbon copy of RMS's. You don't need to repeat it. It would be nice if you
would actually justify that opinion, though.
Commercial use:
Because I as an user of a videogame don't need the freedom to sell the game.
If I'm
Now that have a lot more sense to me than just Because it's not your place
to tell me what I can do with my property. The second one kind of reject any
copyright law and even conditions like give appropriate credit whenever is
changed or shared.
Look, I know you're trying to pick apart my
Alright, the people behind do something unethical. However you haven't
respond to that part of my message yet. Shouldn't be avoided just because you
have a good reason to considered it unethical? (you have one, right?)
I'm sure a lot of the products I use were made, designed, or distributed
I'm of the opinion that restricting the four freedoms is inherently
unethical, so all works should be libre, and I make a point of putting a
libre culture license (either CC BY-SA or CC0 for works that aren't programs)
on all of my works. However, I don't think boycotting non-libre cultural
Hi,
I love the idea, we must however note that, if the game engines are free
software, free games can be made from then. See Freedoom for example, if
the PrBoom game engine wasn't free software
(http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/PrBoom), Freedoom wouldn't be considered
a free software Doom IWAD
good idea pizzaman! If only your pizza was half as good as this list you
made.. arr
:P
I agree too, is nice to have media that respects the four freedoms. But the
issue that I see here is the position of that wiki page on what's good and
bad, and the position of Trisquel. As far a I know we follow GNU FSDG not
DSFG from Debian, so what DSFG has to say doesn't really apply
What's the deal with Creative Commons Sampling Plus license?
To qualify as a Free Culture work (which seems to be the standard is being
used here by the OP) it must be available for both commercial and
non-commercial distribution. If you understand their viewpoint, then you'll
understand
I apologies for the misunderstanding, but I tough you would agree with the
idea that everything that have a good reason to be considered unethical
should be avoided. But instead you have a view that is strange to me. You
think that dragon ball is unethical, and yet you recommend it to other
I don't think that Dragon Ball is unethical. I think that the authors and
publishers of Dragon Ball are doing something unethical when they restrict
people from redistributing it. That's a very important distinction.
Alright, the people behind do something unethical. However you haven't
I don't think that Dragon Ball is unethical. I think that the authors and
publishers of Dragon Ball are doing something unethical when they restrict
people from redistributing Dragon Ball. That's a very important distinction.
Because in my opinion this render pay what ever you want
That's the opposite of what I said. Read again. I think it's pointless to
boycott non-libre works, and even destructive. Personally, The Ur-Quan
Masters and King's Quest VI (both of which are non-libre culture) are some of
my favorite games, and I don't hesitate to recommend them. I'm also a
To qualify as a Free Culture it has to be in the public domain or basically
in the public domain (like CC0). If that's the intention of the wiki page
then the name has to be changed. Rejected games list sounds like this is
position of Trisquel.
Trisquel has a policy against proprietary art (game data), thus this policy
should be enforced in the Trisquel wiki.
I'm of the opinion that restricting the four freedoms is inherently
unethical
So you say that all works need to respect four freedoms? Well mister, I hope
you know what medicine to avoid, since chances are that vaccine/pill has
various pattens, What food to avoid, because of the same, And
And what's that policy?
The art can be copyrighted since it is art and not software. If the game
engine is open, then there shouldn't be a problem since the FSF is more
concerned with keeping software open.
So what? What's the big deal with proprietary game data? (assuming that they
allow non-commercial distribution)
That's the FSF official policy on the matter AFAIK. However Libregamewiki
(which is the source for that material) and e.g. Debian disagree. I think
think that probably while not
A Tale In The Desert - Arx Fatalis While the engine of Arx Fatalis was
freed, this does not include the game data.
So what? What's the big deal with proprietary game data? (assuming that they
allow non-commercial distribution)
AssaultCube Reloaded - Several data files are under non-commercial license
Under this context I suppose this means that forbids non-commercial
distribution. But if you read it alone is confusing, could mean that or the
opposite. Better make it clear with something like Several data files
Be The Wumpus - contains sounds under CC Sampling+. Most of them are from
Freesound; some are PD or CC0; but tens of sounds made by two people
(including the author) are under CC Sampling+.
What's the deal with Creative Commons Sampling Plus license?
Amnesia: A Machine For Pigs - commercial close source http://www.aamfp.com/
(2013-08-18)
Using the word commercial there could be misinterpreted as is bad because of
being commercial and propietary better get rid of that word when used in a
negative context, unless you want people to call
Hi all! I've imported a list of games that might be mistakenly seen as libre,
but are not. Have a peek: https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/rejected-games-list
46 matches
Mail list logo
