Final Burn Neo > FBN Discussion
FBA license and the non-commercial restriction
Sturm:
This topic was probably discussed somewhere in the past, but... as Mame is trying to change its own license (trying to be open for real), I think it's time to bring it back.
So, the question is: why FBA uses a specific license instead an international standard one and why it uses a non-commercial restriction, which conflicts directly to the very concept of "openness" adopted by the open source world, from Open Knowledge to Wikimedia Foundations?
- http://opendefinition.org/
- http://games.slashdot.org/story/15/05/16/133227/mame-changing-license-to-fully-libre-one
- http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC
- http://www.fbalpha.com/license/
Regards, Sturm
JacKc:
Hi Sturm,
I think the best person to answer correctly to your question is Treble Winner but i will give you my point of view.
If FBA is still using a non-commercial restriction, it is because many of the FBA derivated builds are still distributed without source...Even if by the past some warnings were given to them!
In the MAME case you can notice most of the derivated builds are distributed with source (MAMEUIFX, MAME Plus, MAME Ash-Build, etc...). Few minor obscur builds are still distributed without source.
Best regards,
JacKc.
iq_132:
--- Quote from: Sturm on October 03, 2015, 02:48:51 AM ---This topic was probably discussed somewhere in the past, but... as Mame is trying to change its own license (trying to be open for real), I think it's time to bring it back.
So, the question is: why FBA uses a specific license instead an international standard one and why it uses a non-commercial restriction, which conflicts directly to the very concept of "openness" adopted by the open source world, from Open Knowledge to Wikimedia Foundations?
- http://opendefinition.org/
- http://games.slashdot.org/story/15/05/16/133227/mame-changing-license-to-fully-libre-one
- http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC
- http://www.fbalpha.com/license/
Regards, Sturm
--- End quote ---
I don't like people making money from my hard work.
Barry Harris:
We are also bound by the original Finalburn license.
Any discussion after that is utterly futile.
Sturm:
Thanks for the replies, folks! :smilie:
So, let's continue...
--- Quote from: iq_132 on October 07, 2015, 10:47:37 AM ---I don't like people making money from my hard work.
--- End quote ---
I understand your point, iq_132. But, in a second thought, perhaps you may notice that the real freedom relies under the remove of any non-commercial restriction. Take a look at the free software world. If you pay attention to it, you will find the four essential freedoms, and the very first and crucial one is (called "Level 0" freedom):
--- Quote ---The freedom to run the program as you wish, for ANY PURPOSE (freedom 0).
--- End quote ---
Imagine, for example, if Linux could be blocked by a non-commercial restriction. Or even Wikipedia! Would us be allowed to use and teach Wikipedia inside private schools? Would Android be used inside billions of devices? And how about the thousands of commercial projects using Arduino? Think about it! The Free Software Foundation, the Wikimedia Foundation, the Open Knowledge Foundation... all of them rejects completely the non-commercial restrictions. And now, even MAME developers. Richard Stallman stated once that the non-commercial restriction is so awful that if you want to use it, you must use a non-derivative restriction attached, to "kill the dirtiness right from the beginning". I am long time contributor to the open knowledge world and I am always happy when I see someone spreading the work done (getting money from it or not).
Obviously contrary opinions must be respected. But I think that is not a bad idea to allow us to review some of our opinions.
Regards,
Sturm
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version