The Powder Toy

GPL-3?

  • kroq-gar78     5th May 2012 Member 0 Permalink
    Should The Powder Toy's LICENSE file be upgraded to GPL v3? GPL v2 (which is currently in the LICENSE file) was superseeded by v3, so I think it should be used instead. I, personally, though I am no legal mind, see no reason why one would prefer v2 over v3.
  • vanquish349     5th May 2012 Member 0 Permalink
    could you post the major differences between the 2?
  • kroq-gar78     5th May 2012 Member 0 Permalink
    From http://stackoverflow.com/questions/41460/what-are-the-differences-between-gpl-v2-and-gpl-v3-licenses:

    internationalization: they used new terminology, rather than using language tied to US legal concepts

    patents: they specifically address patents (including the Microsoft/Novell issue noted in another answer)

    “Tivo-ization”: they address the restrictions (like Tivo’s) in consumer products that take away, though hardware, the ability to modify the software

    DRM: they address digital rights management (which they call digital restrictions management)

    compatibility: they addressed compatibility with some other open source licenses

    termination: they addressed specifically what happens if the license is violated and the cure of violations
  • jacksonmj     5th May 2012 Developer 1 Permalink
    The BSON library that is in the source at the moment is under Apache License 2.0, which is compatible with GPLv3 but not GPLv2. So yes, maybe we should change the Powder Toy license to GPLv3+.
  • Simon     5th May 2012 Administrator 1 Permalink
    @jacksonmj (View Post)
    Oops

    Is it actually possible for us to change the license to GPLv3?
  • jacksonmj     5th May 2012 Developer 1 Permalink
    @Simon (View Post)
    All the headers mentioning the GPL that I can find in the source files (and I've found 10 of them) say "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version", so I think it should be.
  • Simon     5th May 2012 Administrator 1 Permalink
    Okay, that's fine then
  • Plasmoid     6th May 2012 Member 0 Permalink
    Would it be all right if I compile TPT and mod it then sell it in the mac app store, but have source available?
  • pilojo     6th May 2012 Member 0 Permalink
    @Plamoid (View Post)
    I don't think you can sell a product under GPL...
  • jacksonmj     6th May 2012 Developer 1 Permalink
    @Plamoid (View Post)
    I don't think the GPL is compatible with the Mac App Store terms of use, so no.

    http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-enforcement

    And wikipedia: "Disallowed types of applications revealed by Apple include: Open source software licensed only under the GPL"

    There is no problem with you compiling TPT and modding it and selling it, as long as you follow the terms of the GPL in doing so. One requirement is giving everyone who buys it access to the source at no extra charge. But one of the other requirements is that anyone who buys it must be able to do whatever they wish with it, such as copying, modifying, or reselling it, or giving it away for free - and I believe this requirement is not compatible with the Mac App Store terms of use.

    Apple cannot legally distribute GPL software through the app store, since the GPL says they do not have permission to distribute the software if the restrictions in Apple's TOS are imposed on the recipient of the software.

    @pilojo (View Post)
    You can, provided you comply with the GPL while doing so.
    http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
You need to login before you can post replies