Open source license

**HairyFotr** · 19-01-2005, 09:11 PM

I'm planing to release the source of the game Djuk Njuk in the near future, and I need some advice on which license would be the best.
I like the MIT, because its short and straight to the point, and (i think) covers everything, but i'd like to hear from someone with more experience in this field.
Does the "right to sublicense and/or sell" actually mean, someone can license it comercially and make money of it. If yes I'd rather pick another license.

I learnt all my OpenGL and quite some new Delphi skills on this project, so i'd like to offer it under a license, under which everyone can learn off it, but i kindda don't like the idea of someone making money from "stealing" the source.

Most licenses are contained here:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/

**Traveler** · 19-01-2005, 10:53 PM

I haven't looked into licenses yet that much, but if you are afraid that someone is going to 'steal' your code to make money out of it, then my advice would be not to release it.
No matter what license you put on it, with different graphics, other sounds, new levels and a few functional changes in the game itself, not that many people are going to see the similarities beteween your game and 'theirs'. (Especially because so few know your game)

**cairnswm** · 20-01-2005, 04:48 AM

I have not looked at licenses in detail but here is a good site with a wide variety of licenses:

http://java.net/choose_license.csp
or
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/

My personal choice is the CPL as I like sharing my knowledge. Products I write for sale do not have the source released.

**{MSX}** · 20-01-2005, 07:46 AM

Originally Posted by HairyFotr

Does the "right to sublicense and/or sell" actually mean, someone can license it comercially and make money of it. If yes I'd rather pick another license.

I don't know that license in detail, but if i'm right they can sell your program (or derived work) but they must still provide the sources and the right to redistribute it. At least, the GPL works this way.

That's not a bad thing.. for example, if you forbid to sell commercially / get money by it, than your program can not be shipped with papers.

The freedom to sell an open source program doesn't mean "stealing code". If you release the code, is becouse you want other people to use it.

I suggest you to choose the GPL. It's the most common and the most supported.

**HairyFotr** · 20-01-2005, 07:52 AM

Well it will probaly be a while, until i'll be able to sell my own games.. i'm 17

And Djuk Njuk isn't really a game, that someone could get rich from these days, so in this case it doesent really matter.
Its more about releasing the knowledge to others. And for that probaly just about every lisense in those links is good.

**HairyFotr** · 20-01-2005, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by {MSX}

I don't know that license in detail, but if i'm right they can sell your program (or derived work) but they must still provide the sources and the right to redistribute it. At least, the GPL works this way.

Well that's what i was looking for. I didn't litteraly mean "steal code". Offcourse they can use it, but as far as i understood the MIT license allows other to license it under a different license and sell it, without giving credit, or providing the source.

After reading the MIT again i saw this:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

So i guess was wrong

Well if GPL works like that, ill release the game under it.

Thanks for the replies.