Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sergius]

I don't know if this is the right forum to ask, but I want to know if anybody here is enlightened in the ways of Open Source licensing, as it applies to the non-code parts of any work, such as a game.

Let's say I decide I want to make a game about some Superhero Space Puppies that have powers and a story and a backstory, and so on and so forth, and that against all odds I manage to achieve some sort of incredibly deep and potentially award-winning writing.

So I take all sorts of GNU'd softs and libraries and stuff. Now, I think if I use these libs, I'm supposed to make my own work open too (GNU'd also, as in Copyleft). I don't mind for instance that the source code itself is open, because it will most likely be crap and I don't mind others using it as a sort of "engine" for their own games. But let's say someday I remake my story with some incredible 3D super-duper particle effects with Virtual Reality. Or maybe just some crappy OpenGL, who cares. The gameplay doesn't even have to be the same.

The question is, have I made my writing, characters, Space Puppies, open-source too? (whatever that means) so that anyone can fork the whole thing and just call it Space Puppies go to Mars or whatever and reuse every single plot point I've written without needing my consent or paying any sort of royalty?

This may all seem a little far fetched, in fact a bit pretentious (that was by design, just a bit of humour, also I'm pretty bored at work and I didn't want to just write a tiny paragraph).

TL;DR: if I use copyleft open-source libraries to make a game, all the original art/plot/etc has to become open too?

[Soulwynd]

Afaik you can split your work between GNU and copyrighted. As in, you could copyright the intellectual content and make the source code GNU.

I guess you should actually go read the licensing documents instead.

[Sergius]

I've read most, or parts, of GNU. But there's now GNU 2, which supposedly covers said "workarounds" such as only opening parts of your work. I haven't had time to read it deeply, but the topic is still a bit confusing so I hoped anyone else already had some sort of distilled wisdom on the subject. The crazy marxist GNU dude even said he didn't want people to link to GNU libraries *externally* which could be done with the first version of GNU, and that's one of the reasons he drafted the 2nd version. (so that even if you just link an unmodified DLL of a library you still have to open your entire code).

I also know there are many other licences than GNU but GNU is what's used for most o.s. libraries.

[DJ]

Now, I think if I use these libs, I'm supposed to make my own work open too (GNU'd also, as in Copyleft).

Actually, you don't have to. At least not for SDL, but I'm guessing that it's the same for all GNU'd libraries. But don't quote me on that! Anyway, see here how it works for SDL.

[Sowelu]

As a general rule, these open source licenses aren't viral.  If you change the open-source PARTS, then you have to release your changes.

So if you make a roguelike that makes calls to an open source library, then nothing of yours becomes open-source.  If you make changes to that library, like speed improvements, or custom stuff to handle game-specific applications, then only your changes TO THE LIBRARY become open source.

[Dasleah]

You own the rights to any (original) intellectual property that you create - characters, settings, plot, anything. When you get some open source code, the 'open source' part only applies to the code itself, not the ideas or concepts expressed in using it. The only way this expressly changes is if you stipulate otherwise, such as releasing your IP under a Creative Commons licence and including all the appropriate documentation.

Remember, the licence only applies to the code. Nothing else unless stated otherwise.