Free for Code | Games Developers

Blog Entry

Free for Code

(jlucard, 18:27:48 - 21 Sep 2011 - Random)

In the past I published a number of source code files here. I never thought that anyone would complain about that. The fact I post buggy pieces of badly written C# in a website paid for from my unwanted cash pile doesn’t mean anybody out there has to actually use it. In fact most don’t – hardly anybody even reads what I write when it comes to that. Imagine then how surprised this particular dark overlord (me, I will destroy you) was when asked recently if he had a license to give away code for free! Apparently simply posting a source file in a public domain forum and saying “do whatever you fancy with this you kinky handsome bastard” is not enough for some people. There are laws and procedures to uphold. You can’t just go ahead and perform such despicable and extreme acts like being helpful to others nowadays; this constitutes antisocial behaviour. Bad overlord, go eat your dried frog pills now.

The first problem with publishing free code is that nobody out there seems to agree what the word free actually means. Wikipedia’s relevant page lists more than 40 types of licenses, most of which interpret that word in completely different and in some cases innovative ways. Some of them even have multiple versions, as apparently the word free seems to change in meaning quite frequently. And that is only the “official” ones, those available for use by the general public. Do try searching for “free code license” on Google. It returns about 247 million pages – going through those might be a good cure for insomnia if you do not mind the side effects. I guess the whole point of such an exercise would be to prove that free can mean whatever the legal terms and conditions apply define it as. Words mean nothing and reality is a matter of interpretation, terms and conditions apply.

The second problem, and the one that really complicates things, is copyright. That by definition belongs to the person that compiles a piece of work, unless of course he or she did so on behalf of someone else in exchange for I ought you notes (you know, those worthless paper tissues we call money). Now this does complicated things. Even though you might want to give your code (or photograph, 3D model, or whatever) away for free, those who might want to use it will want some sort of assurance, a license that it can be used for the x, y, z reason just in case there is a legal dispute later. This is not as far fetched as it might initially sound. Technology companies seem to spend incredible amounts of money and time suing each other – some do not even make products anymore! In such a hostile environment free means nothing at all, not without a license anyway. It is no more than a vague verbal agreement which renders an artefact unusable and unacceptable by the law abiding model citizens that represent the IT industries today.

As a consequence my crime is a very serious one indeed. I have stated that something is free without attaching a proper license – oh the horror – without the typical terms and conditions, not even to deny liability; a travesty, an act of ultimate perversion, an act of treason towards the values of the corporate establishment. I have been found guilty of been unfit to be a member of the civilised society, terms and conditions apply. On my defence I know what free means and this is something I have iterated multiple times in the past to get my point across. It simply means I do not bloody care. In more legal terms this actually translates as forfeiting my copyright assuming (wait for it) that the laws of wherever allow me to do so! As for my new found infamy, well, I do not care about that either actually. I am a dark overlord of chaos after all – compliance does not rank highly in my list of priorities.

P.S. I do not normally bother with referencing when I am set to “insane person ranting” mode. However I expect not everybody here would be comfortable giving their work away for free. A good starting point for those that want to research this further is:

Smashing Magazine June 14th 2011, Understanding Copyright and Licenses, Last Accessed 21 Sep 2011

jlucard's blog
Login or register

NesCartesius

03:56:00 - 22 Sep 2011

Do you mean to say that someone wanted to use the code but didn't because they saw no specific license allowing them to do so under specific terms and conditions, or that they wanted to know if you had a license to publish your own code? If the latter, on what grounds? Does the license for using this particular programming language actually forbid publishing code written in it? Even for teaching purposes? Would a university have to ask for permission o teach it?

Or was the problem that they understood you gave freedom to use in commercial work? I thought it was clearly understood it was meant as a tutorial.

Is there a specific license? If there is a yet unstated copyright claim, bad news for the programming industry. Especially if this is connected to Windows libraries included with the .NET framework.

jlucard

06:31:02 - 22 Sep 2011

The discussion was mainly about the follow the line 3D with all its source code been published rather than the actual tutorials. I wish someone wanted to use the code - but no. The person that rahter politely told me off was a fellow madman that had issues with licenses in the past. The fact that the code I do these days is C# has nothing to do with anything btw. Programs are no more than text files - you can pretty much do whatever you like with them as long as you do not use them to insite terrorism, civil disorder or whatever terms and conditions apply to the "free" speach definition in the country you are from.

Chain smoking makes you thin

NesCartesius

05:35:00 - 23 Sep 2011

So, the issue is not that the code was written in c#. He would still have told you off if it was written in Pascal, assembly or whatever. Good (although i did read some nasty things about microsoft's patents). Now, if the problem is actually the programmers liability for evil use of his/her program, i still think you are safe. It was a game. You might have been causing trouble for yourself if you had been giving out decryption code, or something.

Still, your fellow madman is at least correct in principle. Lawyers can cause a lot of trouble if they are given anything to stand on (like Archimedes and his lever being able to move the earth, the lever being a long winded and nonsensical argument that they can extend to infinity and beyond). And civil liability (in contrast to criminal law) can be objective in certain cases, in other words you don't have to be negligent to be liable. So, it doesn't hurt to include a specific license or disclaimer.

jlucard

17:37:00 - 23 Sep 2011

I know he is correct, and that is exactly what the problem is. We reached a point where learning programming is not enough. Developers these days need to have at least a basic understanding of intellectual property law. Using anything you did not make yourself requires long hours of reviewing license agreements and ensuring compliance. Even then you can be a potential victim of pattern abuse. On top of everything you need safeguards to protect yourself against insane people with too much time in their hands with billions of deniability closes. Sometimes I miss the lawless 80s and those primitive 8-bit computers.

Chain smoking makes you thin

NesCartesius

18:39:00 - 23 Sep 2011

Indeed, all those magazines back then, with the endless listings, free code, programming tricks etc, and not a single mention of copyright or disclaimer. And the advice for cheats and tricks using the disk editors, remember those? Nobody cared.

In fact, nostalgia has hit some really hard here in Greece. The early computing magazine Pixel has been digitized, and all issues (now useless but of great sentimental value) are available on the internet. Multi page reviews of 8bit games, programs in basic, electronic circuit building instructions, turtle - robot blueprints... priceless.

	Games Developers Dark Overlord of Chaos Edition	Forum Blog FAQ About