Very good music you have made. Finding people willing to make good music for
games it’s not an easy task. You made it a lot easier for us.
Thanks, keep up the good work 
2009/4/7 Neil White > some debian games the binaries are avalable in apt, and to avoid licencing
issues the binary then asks you to press < OK > to download the data files
from a different location
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
Exactly. As the copyright holder, you can license it as many times and
ways as you want (so long as you haven’t made some kind of 'exclusivity’
agreement with someone, in which case you’ve reduced your rights by
contract.)
IANAL.On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 02:27:12AM +0200, Erik wrote:
Saturn Almighty skrev:
If the song is in a game, then its obliged to abide by that game’s license,
but if it isn’t in a game, (or in use elsewhere), then its not a problem to
"change" the license.Yes of course you can not take back the song that you have released
under a certain license, but if you have the copyright, you can release
it under another license too.
–
-bill!
Sent from my computer
Of course, the licenses cannot be mutually exclusive.
You cannot revoke the By-CC license once it has been granted and replace it with a restrictive license.
IANAL either… I just read the fine print.
:Pat> ----- Original Message -----
From: nbs@sonic.net (Bill Kendrick)
To: A list for developers using the SDL library. (includes SDL-announce)
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2009 12:37:13 PM
Subject: Re: [SDL] music for your games!On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 02:27:12AM +0200, Erik wrote:
Saturn Almighty skrev:
If the song is in a game, then its obliged to abide by that game’s license,
but if it isn’t in a game, (or in use elsewhere), then its not a problem to
"change" the license.Yes of course you can not take back the song that you have released
under a certain license, but if you have the copyright, you can release
it under another license too.Exactly. As the copyright holder, you can license it as many times and
ways as you want (so long as you haven’t made some kind of 'exclusivity’
agreement with someone, in which case you’ve reduced your rights by
contract.)IANAL.
–
-bill!
Sent from my computer
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
Of course, the licenses cannot be mutually exclusive.
Nope! If you’re the copyright owner, you can sell proprietary licenses
at the same time as putting it out as GPL (which can be a valid
strategy, somewhat like Galaxy Gameworks is doing for SDL: you can pay
them to be liberated from the LGPL restrictions). One could have a
slightly improved version as the proprietary one, such as what Aladdin
used to do with Ghostscript (the GPL version was one behind, or
something like that).
You cannot revoke the By-CC license once it has been granted and replace it with a restrictive license.
That bit is true, though, if it’s been released with a certain
license, then that license works a bit like a two-way contract: as
long as the licensee keeps his part of the bargain, the licensor can’t
just “pull the rug out from under you”. But in the case of software,
you can definitely decide not to release new versions under the GPL,
say, you just can’t retroactively invalidate the license of the older
GPL’d versions.
For By-CC, dual-licensing doesn’t make much sense though… Would
someone really pay money not to have to put the artist’s name in the
credits for their proprietary game?!?On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Patryk Bratkowski wrote:
Yeah, I guess I didn’t quite express myself correctly.
Since you own the copyright you can release it however you wish, but in the case of the CC license, which is irrevocable, releasing it under a commercial license will not void the CC license.
So you can impose restrictions on its use, but people are still free to use it under the CC license, making it an exercise in futility.
And yeah, I work a lot with MySQL which has a similar approach.
Their API is GPL’d, so to write commercial applications you have to pay royalties for the server.
Pat
(Also, for GPL dual licensing, you have to own the entire code-base… MySQL are writing their own C++ API, because MySQL++ had too many contributions from too many people, making it legally impossible to release commercially)> ----- Original Message -----
From: pphaneuf@gmail.com (Pierre Phaneuf)
To: A list for developers using the SDL library. (includes SDL-announce)
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2009 1:46:40 PM
Subject: Re: [SDL] music for your games!On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Patryk Bratkowski <@Patryk_Bratkowski> wrote:
Of course, the licenses cannot be mutually exclusive.
Nope! If you’re the copyright owner, you can sell proprietary licenses
at the same time as putting it out as GPL (which can be a valid
strategy, somewhat like Galaxy Gameworks is doing for SDL: you can pay
them to be liberated from the LGPL restrictions). One could have a
slightly improved version as the proprietary one, such as what Aladdin
used to do with Ghostscript (the GPL version was one behind, or
something like that).You cannot revoke the By-CC license once it has been granted and replace it with a restrictive license.
That bit is true, though, if it’s been released with a certain
license, then that license works a bit like a two-way contract: as
long as the licensee keeps his part of the bargain, the licensor can’t
just “pull the rug out from under you”. But in the case of software,
you can definitely decide not to release new versions under the GPL,
say, you just can’t retroactively invalidate the license of the older
GPL’d versions.For By-CC, dual-licensing doesn’t make much sense though… Would
someone really pay money not to have to put the artist’s name in the
credits for their proprietary game?!?–
http://pphaneuf.livejournal.com/
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
I like releasing under cc, but it isn’t a problem to dual license to
meet your needs. Let’s not turn this into a license thread…
By the way, I checked out Widelands, and talked to the people there,
and I will be writing a few tracks for them. Thanks for the heads up!On Apr 7, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Patryk Bratkowski wrote:
Yeah, I guess I didn’t quite express myself correctly.
Since you own the copyright you can release it however you wish, but
in the case of the CC license, which is irrevocable, releasing it
under a commercial license will not void the CC license.So you can impose restrictions on its use, but people are still free
to use it under the CC license, making it an exercise in futility.And yeah, I work a lot with MySQL which has a similar approach.
Their API is GPL’d, so to write commercial applications you have to
pay royalties for the server.Pat
(Also, for GPL dual licensing, you have to own the entire code-
base… MySQL are writing their own C++ API, because MySQL++ had too
many contributions from too many people, making it legally
impossible to release commercially)----- Original Message ----
From: Pierre Phaneuf
To: A list for developers using the SDL library. (includes SDL-
announce)
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2009 1:46:40 PM
Subject: Re: [SDL] music for your games!On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Patryk Bratkowski <pbratkowski at yahoo.com wrote:
Of course, the licenses cannot be mutually exclusive.
Nope! If you’re the copyright owner, you can sell proprietary licenses
at the same time as putting it out as GPL (which can be a valid
strategy, somewhat like Galaxy Gameworks is doing for SDL: you can pay
them to be liberated from the LGPL restrictions). One could have a
slightly improved version as the proprietary one, such as what Aladdin
used to do with Ghostscript (the GPL version was one behind, or
something like that).You cannot revoke the By-CC license once it has been granted and
replace it with a restrictive license.That bit is true, though, if it’s been released with a certain
license, then that license works a bit like a two-way contract: as
long as the licensee keeps his part of the bargain, the licensor can’t
just “pull the rug out from under you”. But in the case of software,
you can definitely decide not to release new versions under the GPL,
say, you just can’t retroactively invalidate the license of the older
GPL’d versions.For By-CC, dual-licensing doesn’t make much sense though… Would
someone really pay money not to have to put the artist’s name in the
credits for their proprietary game?!?–
http://pphaneuf.livejournal.com/
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
2009/4/7 <6.saturn.6 at gmail.com>
Let’s not turn this into a license thread…
we need more threads on licensing issues! there arnt enough right now!
Why not a licensing FAQ?
This is a good start:
http://www.libsdl.org/license-lgpl.php
but it could note special thingies like we’ve mentioned in this thread.
Jonny DOn Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 5:02 AM, Neil White wrote:
2009/4/7 <6.saturn.6 at gmail.com>
?Let’s not turn this into a license thread…
we need more threads on licensing issues! there arnt enough right now!
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org