Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

If it's not ZDoom, it goes here.
User avatar
wildweasel
Posts: 21706
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 7:33 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Operating System Version (Optional): A lot of them
Graphics Processor: Not Listed

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by wildweasel »

yum13241 wrote: Thu Jan 12, 2023 2:33 pm I agree.

Why do I feel like D_COUNTD is playing??
Because it's called Countdown to Death. (of the Universe)
Why does this read like you haven't read any of the replies to your posts? It's not gonna go down that easily. Even with the OGL problem, there's significant, MEASURABLE pushback, as the entirety of the tabletop gaming community (including some very notable names) is letting WOTC know that, no, this is not acceptable.
yum13241
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 8:08 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Operating System Version (Optional): EndeavorOS (basically Arch)
Graphics Processor: Intel with Vulkan/Metal Support

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by yum13241 »

I get that, it's just that the crap state of the world sucks.


Eventually the world will get to a point where companies can do whatever the fsck they want and no one will object, nor can they. A fate worse than death.
User avatar
Da Spadger
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 10:12 am

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Da Spadger »

Solution: Disregard copyright law.

Be a pirate.

Pirates are fucking awesome.
User avatar
Kinsie
Posts: 7402
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 9:22 am
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support
Location: MAP33

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Kinsie »

If Id/Bethesda/MS were interested in trying to put the genie back in the lamp in any way, they probably wouldn't have hired on source port authors as contractors on the official Unity-based port's various updates.

Plus, much to the surprise of anyone who lived through the 90s, Microsoft is pretty big on open-source stuff nowadays, on account of the whole owning-Github thing.

So in short, ain't happenin'.
yum13241 wrote: Thu Jan 12, 2023 3:50 pm I get that, it's just that the crap state of the world sucks.


Eventually the world will get to a point where companies can do whatever the fsck they want and no one will object, nor can they. A fate worse than death.
A little pessimism is healthy and will help you avoid a bit of trouble in life, but try to avoid becoming an Internet Nihilist slamming the nothing matters button. Nobody likes them and frankly, it's not good for the soul.

Relevant commentary from the EFF (for what that's worth). The GPL is explicitly irrevocable, while the WOTC OGL... is not.
Blzut3
 
 
Posts: 3188
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:59 pm
Graphics Processor: ATI/AMD with Vulkan/Metal Support

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Blzut3 »

I'm not a lawyer of course, but the key difference with the GPL to me is section 6 from GPLv2 (since that's what Doom was released under):
6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.
Emphasis is mine. Effectively when you license under the GPL you are granting the licensee the ability to redistribute the work and grant further users a license to that work under the same terms. The OGL doesn't really have that language unless you argue the meaning of "authorized version" in section 9, which as others have mentioned is debatable. Which is to say Wizards of the Coast may have reserved the right to stop granting new OGL 1.0a licenses going forwards.

The EFF's comments that Kinsie linked reflect this sentiment as well (see first paragraph of the update). Another way to put that is the OGL is similar to purchasing a perpetual license to some piece of software, you can use it forever but you're not granted the right to grant others copies of the software. The GPL on the other hand does.

If there was a hypothetical situation where Bethesda/Microsoft did want to try the revoke the license the route they would go is claiming they never licensed the work under the GPL in the first place. From what I understand id software never hosted the GPL version of the Doom source code in a first party location (the GPL release was uploaded by myk based on written permission in an old forum). Where this would fall apart quickly is that the official iPhone version of Doom was based off the community's work and id Software acknowledged and followed the obligations under the GPL. So ultimately I don't think there's anything to worry about.
Professor Hastig
Posts: 256
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2023 2:02 am
Graphics Processor: nVidia (Modern GZDoom)

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Professor Hastig »

Kinsie wrote: Thu Jan 12, 2023 8:35 pm Plus, much to the surprise of anyone who lived through the 90s, Microsoft is pretty big on open-source stuff nowadays, on account of the whole owning-Github thing.

So in short, ain't happenin'.
I think this is what many people tend to overlook. Even several more recent parts of Windows, like the new terminal, are open source. If a company like Microsoft recognizes the value of open source software for their main product they surely have no reason to start a nuclear war against FOSS licenses.

If Apple was involved I'd be more worried. They are the ones, after all, that turned a free OS core into an increasingly locked down platform.
yum13241
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 8:08 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Operating System Version (Optional): EndeavorOS (basically Arch)
Graphics Processor: Intel with Vulkan/Metal Support

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by yum13241 »

WOTC OGL... is not.
Frankly I don't even play D&D, I just came since this whole situation kinda pisses me off.
Solution: Disregard copyright law.

Be a pirate.

Pirates are fucking awesome.
100% agree.
Just don't pirate Doom, mkay?


Hell, my family watches movies on this crappy receiver that just gets its movies from pirate sites, and they don't care. Here's hoping the FBI doesn't travel internationally to arrest us... /s
User avatar
Chris
Posts: 2958
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 12:07 am
Graphics Processor: ATI/AMD with Vulkan/Metal Support

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Chris »

Blzut3 wrote: Thu Jan 12, 2023 11:17 pm Effectively when you license under the GPL you are granting the licensee the ability to redistribute the work and grant further users a license to that work under the same terms. The OGL doesn't really have that language unless you argue the meaning of "authorized version" in section 9, which as others have mentioned is debatable.
But it does:
2. The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License.
[...]
4. Grant and Consideration: In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game Content.
[...]
10. Copy of this License: You MUST include a copy of this License with every copy of the Open Game Content You Distribute.
where "Use"/"Used" is expressly and explicitly defined:
(g) "Use", "Used" or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content.
and "Distribute" is further defined:
(c) "Distribute" means to reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute;
So you are granted a perpetual right to (modify,) reproduce and license content given to you under the license, and you must include the same license with every copy you make.

The question is whether WotC/Hasbro can "deauthorize" a license to the extent that someone who was already given a license to reproduce with the same license can be prevented from doing so, and must use a different license. IMO, I say no, since part 9 clearly says "You may use any authorized version of this License [for content] originally distributed under any version of this License". There is a big difference between may and must, may indicating an optional, and must indicating a requirement; part 10 clearly indicates MUST, so if that's what part 9 meant, it wouldn't have used "may". This is similar to the common "or any later version" you often see with GPL-licensed software (except rather than 'any later version', it's 'any authorized version'). There's no indication in the license that a deauthorized version can't be used at all (especially since there is content using the license that has nothing to do with D&D or other WotC properties), it just doesn't give the right to relicense to a non-authorized version, so if you were already licensed to redistribute with the same license, I don't see how they can take the right away like that.

But of course I'm not a lawyer, and Hasbro has lots of money, so they can likely get their way regardless of what's stated in the license.
User avatar
Kinsie
Posts: 7402
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 9:22 am
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support
Location: MAP33

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Kinsie »

Chris wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:21 am But of course I'm not a lawyer, and Hasbro has lots of money, so they can likely get their way regardless of what's stated in the license.
Hasbro has less money than you'd expect (I think MTG is like their one money maker ATM) and Paizo has enough money and zeal to fight if need be. The biggest concern is smaller publishers caught in the middle.
User avatar
Rachael
Posts: 13853
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Rachael »

Professor Hastig wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 1:20 am If Apple was involved I'd be more worried. They are the ones, after all, that turned a free OS core into an increasingly locked down platform.
Mac OS's kernel (Darwin) is still entirely open source and that hasn't changed since the transition to OS X.

Plus the compiler tool (Clang/LLVM) is also open source, and is even a popular tool used on other platforms. Safari (Webkit) I think is also still open source afaik.

These are 3 really critical parts of the operating system (or even at least its building chain) that Microsoft has not open sourced. True that Apple used to be a lot more open source than they are today, credit where credit is due, I think, and they definitely boarded that train long before Microsoft ever even considered it.

The problem with Apple is they are doing the walled garden approach with the API's more than the tools and whatever they had kept open source since the early OS X days. They will not, for example, allow CUDA or Vulkan on the Mac OS platform. (Though the CUDA thing is largely nVidia's fault, but that certainly doesn't help things)
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Posts: 49193
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Graf Zahl »

Rachael wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 7:00 am These are 3 really critical parts of the operating system (or even at least its building chain) that Microsoft has not open sourced. True that Apple used to be a lot more open source than they are today, credit where credit is due, I think, and they definitely boarded that train long before Microsoft ever even considered it.
Once upon a time they were a better company and I am dead certain that they'd immediately close the source if they could if there was an advantage to it. Yet,the core statement is true - they preyed on open source software to produce some of the most locked down systems that ever existed - and for me that's all the credit they ever get. :twisted:
User avatar
CandiceJoy
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 3:04 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Operating System Version (Optional): Win11, MacOS Ventura
Graphics Processor: Apple M1

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by CandiceJoy »

Aside from the whole “higher paid lawyers” nonsense, legally-speaking, this is pretty cut and dry.
4. Grant and Consideration: In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game Content.
This is legally very clear and has a precise meaning. The word perpetual means forever. It does not end. For a license to be revocable, it must actually state that it is revocable upfront. This is simple logic. I could release a fanfic with a super open license, then later decide “oh hey I’m changing the license” then immediately sue everyone who violated the license and win. That’s not how the law works. Contracts can only be terminated if they say they can or if they conflict with a law. Moreover, ambiguity in a contract benefits the party that did not draft it, ergo there’s no esoteric interpretation that could be construed to mean it’s revocable. If it does not say it’s revocable or changeable, then it is not.

They are free to change the license on new sales of the product, and the new license will bind the people that buy it. But any product already in the wild with the old license is still perfectly valid under the old license, and will be in perpetuity, pursuant to section 4 of the license.

Now, that all being said…yes, having better and higher paid lawyers can make them win anyway and enforce their will on the people, but that’s always a risk you run in legal settings, unfortunately. The law itself, however, is very clear on this matter and leaves little to nothing up for interpretation.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Posts: 49193
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Graf Zahl »

Careful: That clause says absolutely nothing about transferring content under the license. All it says that the license governs your use of the item as long as you own it without having to do further payments. You will find similar phrases in non-free commercial licenses.
User avatar
Twitchy2019
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:27 pm
Location: My Foot,Your Face! (Team Monster)

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Twitchy2019 »

I want to be clear on my intentions for making this thread. The intention was to raise the awareness of this seemingly outside affair as to the effect it would have on the Doom community and other open-source initiatives. Too often communities that have little in common beyond a very vague concept were suddenly upheaved by some third party performing a successful attack on that very concept (i.e. Open Source). Many people have echoed this sentiment already in this thread, but the idea needs repeating: The foundations and defenses open-source communities have relied upon yesterday to safe-guard that ideal cannot be relied upon tomorrow. Politics have seemingly become more partisan and extreme more now than they have ever been. This has resulted in courts in several parts of the United States becoming shopping grounds for devious actors and their lawyers looking to break through previously held standards to enforce and entrench their agendas.

Many will say that what was said in the previous paragraph is common sense. But is it going to MOTIVATE you? Motivation is quite a different beast from simply saying, "yeah, x & x is happening, so what?" I am doing my part to prevent apathy towards this situation. You can too by simply talking and discussing. If you can bring more to the table, please do so. We can use all the help we can get. We being all users of anything "Open Source."

This thread is to raise a healthy awareness and by doing so; bring forward a strong, organized coalition that can muster the resources necessary to win the fight against the possible destruction of Doom and open source. This thread is not meant to emotionally manipulate others into brazen attacks or petty arguments. We have enough of that already. I like Doom. I also like the fact that many other products have been released as a result of its popularity. I feel if the Doom community is destroyed, the foundations of nostalgia and passion for it will dwindle, causing amazing content by not only Doom authors, but developers of other games like Dusk or Amid Evil, who cite Doom as an inspiration for their games; to disappear.

Please, by all means, debate and discuss, invite more people to become motivated towards assisting the D&D community as well as holding the fort right here. We must be more united and vigilant now more than ever.
User avatar
Chris
Posts: 2958
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 12:07 am
Graphics Processor: ATI/AMD with Vulkan/Metal Support

Re: Revocation of Doom GPL, A Possibility?

Post by Chris »

Graf Zahl wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 7:33 am Careful: That clause says absolutely nothing about transferring content under the license.
It does:
4. Grant and Consideration: In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game Content.
where "Use" is (note the capitalization, indicating a clear reference to the affixed definition instead of some common meaning):
(g) "Use", "Used" or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content.
and "Distribute" is (again with the capitalization):
(c) "Distribute" means to reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute;
So taken altogether, that clause very clearly says you can copy, reproduce, license, transmit, and otherwise distribute the content.
Last edited by Chris on Fri Jan 13, 2023 9:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

Return to “Off-Topic”