License for software created

Everything else that doesn't fall into one of the other PB categories.
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

Hi,

I understand copyrights to some degree. I'm interested in copyrighting software I develope when I know that I was the one who developed everything included in the software such as code, models, images audio/video files etc etc. I understand that when it comes to copyrighting I believe because it is all my material so there is no question if I'm using any other person's material.

Where I'm not understanding the whole licensing thing is I'm designing a game inspired by another game created by another company, but I'm using my own content that is not exactly like their content and I was going to release it under an MIT license, because a couple of the images I'm using are free to use under a Open GPL license and I was going to note that in the copy of the MIT license.

My question is, do I need a copyright for my content to release it under an MIT license? The reason I ask is because everywhere I look to obtain a copy of an MIT license to use with it, it has a place where copyright information goes such as year and name. Can anyone help me understand this?
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
User avatar
Tenaja
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1948
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:15 pm

Re: License for software created

Post by Tenaja »

The copyright is your claim to ownership, saying you created it and nobody else can claim being the creator. If you are familiar with the "Happy birthday" song popular in the US, everybody sang it at every party and restaurant until someone claimed ownership...then the restaurant servers had to sing a different tune. Then, it was proved that those people were not accurate in their claim, and now servers can sing it again. By copyrighting it, you are claiming it and making it known so that some cheat does not come claim ownership and demand a royalty fee.

The License is how you permit others to use it--and this licence can apply to either compiled code (i.e. Windows 10) or to source code. You can license it as closed source (Windows), and permit others to use the compiled program, or you can license it as open source (Linux) and permit others to use the source and modify it. In the latter case, the specific license determines what conditions they can use/modify the source. Some licenses permit modifying in secret, and others require sharing the modified code. I recommend finding one of the charts that compares the various licenses to make sure you are sharing it with the freedoms and restrictions that you intend.
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

Re: License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

Tenaja wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 2:55 am The copyright is your claim to ownership, saying you created it and nobody else can claim being the creator. If you are familiar with the "Happy birthday" song popular in the US, everybody sang it at every party and restaurant until someone claimed ownership...then the restaurant servers had to sing a different tune. Then, it was proved that those people were not accurate in their claim, and now servers can sing it again. By copyrighting it, you are claiming it and making it known so that some cheat does not come claim ownership and demand a royalty fee.

The License is how you permit others to use it--and this licence can apply to either compiled code (i.e. Windows 10) or to source code. You can license it as closed source (Windows), and permit others to use the compiled program, or you can license it as open source (Linux) and permit others to use the source and modify it. In the latter case, the specific license determines what conditions they can use/modify the source. Some licenses permit modifying in secret, and others require sharing the modified code. I recommend finding one of the charts that compares the various licenses to make sure you are sharing it with the freedoms and restrictions that you intend.
Thank you for your explanations, I do understand licensing even better now than I did. But it isn't really the licenses themselves I was confused enough about to post here. My question at the bottom of my post is really what I'm wondering about. Everywhere I look for a MIT license template to see if I want to use it, there is a place at the top for copyright information which has been leading me to believe that I need to copyright my work to even be able to use an MIT license. Do I have to copyright my material to use any MIT license or not? Yes I do want to copyright my work for this so people can't turn around and say they own it.

Also, if I'm going to use someone's Open GPL content they released for people to use freely under that license and I want to get copyright for my material, do I only send in my material to get it copyrighted? Or do I send in the whole finished product including the Open GPL content with a copy of the Open GPL it is under to get my material copyrighted?
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
AZJIO
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1312
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:48 am

Re: License for software created

Post by AZJIO »

Study the license well, otherwise your code may be available for sale.

When I wanted to use the GPL, a Linux user said that it implied a free compilation tool. I said that I am giving a license to the source code. He said that in this case it is necessary to make a license for the object of creativity, and not for the source code.
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

Re: License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

I will read it thoroughly. I think the best solution is to just use all my own content and no one else's and copyright it all, but release it under MIT license to allow people to use my content under the MIT license. The idea is that this is for a community open source project. I just don't want people to claim my stuff to be theirs and sue me claiming it is theirs. This will actually be my first release of anything I have developed. I have usually kept everything to myself and family. That is why I'm trying to learn about this stuff
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
Axolotl
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:36 pm

Re: License for software created

Post by Axolotl »

Hello Distorted Pixel!

yes, you should document your authorship (as the originator of the piece of work) with the copyright. Regardless of which license version you choose.
Your authorship is of course only for your addition and also for improvements/changes in open source packages. But here you can not change the license. It remains as it is.

As Tenaja already wrote, the license describes a kind of usage permission. I.e. if you want your source code to be used only in open source, then GPL or similar are the right choice. There is a whole series of commonly used licenses with very big differences.
For example, MIT allows a user to use the source code in a closed program, GPL does not.

If you use third party packages you also have to pay attention to the compatibility of the licenses.

Of course, you can also put your own thoughts into a license. I.e. proprietary licenses or dual licenses are quite common for standard product sales.
Just a few spontaneous thoughts.
Mostly running PureBasic <latest stable version and current alpha/beta> (x64) on Windows 11 Home
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

Re: License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

Thank you Axolotl,

Here is how I have intended things to be, I have started a community online about this game I'm developing. I have some people that are helping and some that want to. I want to start a GitHub or real time project account for the team to use. As I have said I want use a MIT license for this project that includes images, 3d models, data files, code and audio files. When should I get a copyright? Before I make GitHub or during the project or after it is say in alpha, beta or completed? And if the project isn't completely done yet at the time what do I say my content is for?

So far my brother and I are doing everything, except one other guy doing data editing. No project online yet. More less this is an on going project for now. It will be done, but we will add to it like patches over time. Etc etc.
I'm just confused about when to get copyright or preregister for now.

Some people just want to play the game

Another thing is, not all content is finished being created.
Maybe preregister for now?
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
AZJIO
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1312
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:48 am

Re: License for software created

Post by AZJIO »

Distorted Pixel
If a person can sell your game, then why should he be an author? In court, you will prove that you are the author of your game, but the license allows use your work in their commercial projects. I think you will not get what you expected. The authorship will be yours, and someone else will earn money from it.
There are countless licenses you could choose from, and pretty much any of them could work except the GPL and it's variants as you are not currently meeting the GPL's requirements for source code distribution (though this would be an easy fix) and you may not be meeting the requirements for availability of the compiler (though this is a bit muddy, and one might need a lawyer to actually understand the lengthy and wordy GPL text relevant to this point).

I don't think there is *any* other license, either open source or proprietary, that would pose similar challenges. So just pick one that suits your goals and intent. I personally try not to use strong copy-left licenses like the GPL, so I cannot recommend the next-closest alternative*, but if you are just looking for open source licenses and want something simple, the MIT or one of the BSD licenses are simple and widely used. You can learn about several options here:

https://opensource.org/licenses

*note: The CC-BY-NC-SA would be the closest license in goals / requirements to the GPL that I am familiar with that does not have the requirements on source and / or compiler availability, but it is not intended for software and is more suitable to documents and artwork.
From the previous post, there is one important criterion that the GPL3 declaration retains the user's confidence in the program, but at the same time limits the ability to check the code by self-compilation.

Before asking, I myself looked for brief information on licenses. I didn't like BSD and MIT because your code could be used commercially. Usually, such a license is convenient for a separate functionality that is used inside other programs, and not for a finished product. That is, a person can simply sell your work without changing it. If this is a separate function, then it is impossible to sell it in this form, it is not needed by anyone. Does BSD meet the requirements for free compilation? The problem persists.
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

Re: License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

AZJIO wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 8:43 pm Distorted Pixel
If a person can sell your game, then why should he be an author? In court, you will prove that you are the author of your game, but the license allows use your work in their commercial projects. I think you will not get what you expected. The authorship will be yours, and someone else will earn money from it.
I started this project because a lot of people in the community wish the glitches in the original game were fixed. It is a game from 1998. So it isn't being updated anymore. I chose to create a replica of the game, but with my own content(non of the content looks exactly like the original) with all the names of everything in game changed to avoid legal issues. I was wanting to release it under an MIT license because the original intent was to have it as a community project/game. I have not intent to make money off of this myself, but I might make another off version to sell.
Should I keep everything to myself and not release anything and just get it done and update it as needed for the community to protect my work including code? Or just not copyright anything and release it under an MIT license for community and I to work on it? Or should I make the people on the team sign an agreement to not release anything to the public/community while we work on it? All I wanted to do was make a working version of the original game for myself and everyone in the community to play and enjoy. I was thinking that if someone wanted to spend legal fees on changing the names back to the original names and call it an official updated version of the original game they could. I never thought about people selling the version I create, but maybe I should. What are people's thoughts? I have never done anything like this before that needed any kind of license. I'm learning. Anyone have thoughts on this?

Also what if I don't release source or other content and keep it to myself and only release the compiled game to the community? Any thoughts on any of this?
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
User avatar
Demivec
Addict
Addict
Posts: 4085
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 3:51 pm
Location: Utah, USA

Re: License for software created

Post by Demivec »

You automatically hold the copyright to things you author and the copyright allows you to determine what is done with those creations. That copyright then allows you to create a license that specifies what can be done with those things.

In your situation, did you contact those that held the license to the game you wished to mimick to see if they would extend a separate license or give permission for your work to make use of names or things from their work for your own purposes? If you did many of the issues you are wondering about would be solved.

Just a note, just because you don't intend to make something from what may be considered a derivative work (it is assumed but not proven), you may cause a loss to the authors of the other work because individuals won't invest money in that work because your's is available for free. If your's is not a derivative work than their potential loss is of no concern. The age of their work is not relevant to whether it is still their work or not.
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

Re: License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

Demivec wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 10:31 pm You automatically hold the copyright to things you author and the copyright allows you to determine what is done with those creations. That copyright then allows you to create a license that specifies what can be done with those things.

In your situation, did you contact those that held the license to the game you wished to mimick to see if they would extend a separate license or give permission for your work to make use of names or things from their work for your own purposes? If you did many of the issues you are wondering about would be solved.

Just a note, just because you don't intend to make something from what may be considered a derivative work (it is assumed but not proven), you may cause a loss to the authors of the other work because individuals won't invest money in that work because your's is available for free. If your's is not a derivative work than their potential loss is of no concern. The age of their work is not relevant to whether it is still their work or not.
No I have not contacted the copyright and license owner about it.
Yes, I am intending to develop a game based on the original company's game, but all names of cities, teams, stadiums, players, coaches, referees and agents would be changed. All original content would not be used, only my own content would be used.

If this is still in possible violation of the original games license then I will have to pull out of the project and change to just developing my own game of that sort. If not then I will continue. I have to admit it is kinda scary thinking about it. Especially this being my first time doing. I will probably pull out of it, but what is your opinion about it?
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
Bitblazer
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 732
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 6:17 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: License for software created

Post by Bitblazer »

Distorted Pixel wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 11:08 pmIf this is still in possible violation of the original games license then I will have to pull out of the project and change to just developing my own game of that sort. If not then I will continue. I have to admit it is kinda scary thinking about it. Especially this being my first time doing. I will probably pull out of it, but what is your opinion about it?
You should definately ask a lawyer because the topic can be complex.
webpage - discord chat links -> purebasic GPT4All
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

Re: License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

Bitblazer wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 11:28 pm
Distorted Pixel wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 11:08 pmIf this is still in possible violation of the original games license then I will have to pull out of the project and change to just developing my own game of that sort. If not then I will continue. I have to admit it is kinda scary thinking about it. Especially this being my first time doing. I will probably pull out of it, but what is your opinion about it?
You should definately ask a lawyer.
Oh, I may have forgotten to mention I will even be changing the name of the game. I am not using the original title.
To my knowledge the company was bought out and eventually reduced to a division and then eventually shut down. Even all the other companies that were involved with them ownership of them etc etc where shut down.

At some point Activision in 2014 revived the Sierra brand and only had announced that they will re-release some if Sierra's older games. The game I was going to design after was not mentioned. I could contact activision and ask them, but I might just pull out and just design my own soccer game.

I don't know how accurate the wiki is about Sierra, but here it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Entertainment

I believe that Activision Blizzard is current owner of the license of the original game. They are being hit with a lot of lawsuits lol

Impressions Games was the developer it could be them, but don't think so
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
User avatar
Demivec
Addict
Addict
Posts: 4085
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 3:51 pm
Location: Utah, USA

Re: License for software created

Post by Demivec »

Distorted Pixel wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 11:08 pmNo I have not contacted the copyright and license owner about it.
Yes, I am intending to develop a game based on the original company's game, but all names of cities, teams, stadiums, players, coaches, referees and agents would be changed. All original content would not be used, only my own content would be used.

If this is still in possible violation of the original games license then I will have to pull out of the project and change to just developing my own game of that sort. If not then I will continue. I have to admit it is kinda scary thinking about it. Especially this being my first time doing. I will probably pull out of it, but what is your opinion about it?
What your doing would probably be called 'cloning' the game. Here's a wiki article to get you some background info on things of that nature.

My initial personal opinion is that it sounds like there is nothing wrong with what you proposed. You said you are not reusing assets. That is good. You said you are not reusing specific names for locations or individuals or the title . That seems more iffy as you might be using the same stadium or city but just calling it by a different name. I mean if a person or place appears the same but is called something different is it really different. The question is if those things are things that are naturally a part of a game of that type. I mean if it supposed to represent things that are part of a certain time or place it seems reasonable to use the proper name for those things. However people or places are really just place holders to make the game work (i.e. a certain number of teams and players with different abilities competing various locations). Another issue is if this game is meant to depict things of a certain time in the past so as to mimic the original game even closer. Why not update the game to a more modern time and use more up-to-date and publicly available statistics? The last item is the game play. It should show some of your own ideas to distinguish it from the other work so as not to be a cut and paste ordeal.
User avatar
Distorted Pixel
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:34 am

Re: License for software created

Post by Distorted Pixel »

Demivec wrote: Wed Oct 06, 2021 1:59 am
Distorted Pixel wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 11:08 pmNo I have not contacted the copyright and license owner about it.
Yes, I am intending to develop a game based on the original company's game, but all names of cities, teams, stadiums, players, coaches, referees and agents would be changed. All original content would not be used, only my own content would be used.

If this is still in possible violation of the original games license then I will have to pull out of the project and change to just developing my own game of that sort. If not then I will continue. I have to admit it is kinda scary thinking about it. Especially this being my first time doing. I will probably pull out of it, but what is your opinion about it?
What your doing would probably be called 'cloning' the game. Here's a wiki article to get you some background info on things of that nature.

My initial personal opinion is that it sounds like there is nothing wrong with what you proposed. You said you are not reusing assets. That is good. You said you are not reusing specific names for locations or individuals or the title . That seems more iffy as you might be using the same stadium or city but just calling it by a different name. I mean if a person or place appears the same but is called something different is it really different. The question is if those things are things that are naturally a part of a game of that type. I mean if it supposed to represent things that are part of a certain time or place it seems reasonable to use the proper name for those things. However people or places are really just place holders to make the game work (i.e. a certain number of teams and players with different abilities competing various locations). Another issue is if this game is meant to depict things of a certain time in the past so as to mimic the original game even closer. Why not update the game to a more modern time and use more up-to-date and publicly available statistics? The last item is the game play. It should show some of your own ideas to distinguish it from the other work so as not to be a cut and paste ordeal.
I will be using different names for absolutely everything in the game. I am puting my ideas into the game that are not in the original. The stadiums will not look like the original ones. Everything about my game will be different. Names of teams, people, places, stadiums, players, coaches, managers, referees, etc etc they will all be different, everything will look different also. The only thing that might be the same is the set up of the leagues(meaning format), seasons, tournaments etc, unless I set it up like it is today and not back then. I could set leagues up different than back then. Again my game will have my ideas in it that are not in the original. I'm going to put in a lot that is not in the original.
To be popular is way to much work. I just want to be me, myself and I. Oh no, does that mean I'm bipolar? :shock:

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care
Post Reply