[Dev] Confusion about game data

Nicolás Reynolds fauno at endefensadelsl.org
Sat Mar 7 19:22:22 GMT 2015

Fabio Pesari <fabio at pesari.eu> writes:

> On 03/07/2015 06:58 PM, Nicolás Reynolds wrote:
>> so you would distribute a binary package that's only useful with artwork
>> not available on repos?  that's like a *nudge nudge* to go use unfree
>> stuff outside them :P
> Well, we distribute emulators and they are only useful with nonfree ROMs
> not available on repos, aren't they?

sure, but do they need to be distributed alongside them?

> What about PDF readers? Web browsers?

i think we should always have freedom #0 in mind.  these are free
software, we shouldn't mess with how people want to use them, while we
don't need to distribute unfree things for them to be useful.

> I personally would see it as a way to support free software and to
> recognize it as such. Those programs are fully functional and free,
> nothing stops users from providing their own assets (as long as the
> required asset pipeline is also free, otherwise the game should be
> blacklisted as a whole).
>> http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC
> I just finished reading it. One interesting thing is that even they
> could not find any conclusions for content users, aside from "ask the
> authors to change the terms of the license".
> If I run a free game, I can read its code and be 100% sure it's not
> backdoored. If its assets are nonfree, I can still be 100% sure that
> it's not backdoored. Let's say my main reason to use free software is
> security or privacy, how would free assets affect me?
> From a content author perspective, I disagree with their conclusions. I
> think the NC still offers a clear advantage: the end users are not
> affected by it, only potential competitors. I think this article is
> being overly optimistic regarding how people value their philosophical
> integrity, especially when profit is concerned. I bet the developers of
> games like UQM don't feel bad about themselves, and why should they?
> They've done more for libre gaming than many other people. By releasing
> a high-quality game, they made a lot of people realize that free gaming
> does not necessarily mean Pac Man clones and text games and attracted
> them to free software.
> And that's why I say that while similar in spirit, Free Software and
> Free Culture are separate movements. Free culture is for the most part
> content author culture while Free software is for the most part user
> culture.

in that case i prefer dmytri kleiner's distinction between free software
and free culture :P


> Of course, a person which champions freedom in general will support
> both, but in my opinion they do not hold the same importance.
>> i've heard of many lawsuits were there wasn't any commercial
>> interest... maybe the gamer community is more forgiving, which i doubt
>> :P
> Usually developers issue a cease-and-desist against noncommercial
> developers, they go harder on those who profit from their IP.
>> ?
> The developers have agreed to free the code but the artists haven't
> agreed to free the assets.
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 584 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20150307/98e5d98b/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list