IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2013-09-17
⏴ go to previous day
00:01:51 <Bad_Brett> by the way, i've done some research about childsprites
00:04:44 <Bad_Brett> both the parent sprite size and the childsprite size must be dividable with 32 on the 4x zoom level... (32x32, 64x96, 256x128 etc.)
00:04:56 <Bad_Brett> the same goes for the offsets
00:05:20 <Bad_Brett> the nml compiler crop option will also mess things up
00:07:20 <Bad_Brett> this problem only occurs when you supply sprites for many zoom levels, which is probably the reason why no one seems to know about it
01:24:43 *** DarkAceZ has joined #openttd
02:15:36 *** retro|cz has joined #openttd
02:53:07 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
04:56:16 *** Eddi|zuHause has joined #openttd
05:38:32 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
06:34:20 *** TomyLobo has joined #openttd
06:57:22 <__ln__> you should czech your timezone
06:59:26 <Xaroth|Work> Greetings and salutaitons.
08:17:52 *** montalvo has joined #openttd
08:34:03 *** LordAro has joined #openttd
10:18:05 *** KenjiE20 has joined #openttd
10:18:06 *** Midnightmyth has joined #openttd
11:58:10 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
12:02:00 *** Tom_Soft has joined #openttd
12:12:42 <Japa> While the source of OpenTTD is GPL, which explicitly allows modifications under certain rules, how kosher would it be to make a game with the same overal gameplay, and sharing as much of the source as possible, but would be in 3d? Is this the kind of thing that would get a buch of community hate?
12:14:03 <V453000> I have nothing to talk into that, but I believe as long as you provide your source, everything is awesome :)
12:15:43 <Japa> Only other major change from traditional Openttd I have planned is limited smooth track capability
12:16:41 <planetmaker> Japa, you can make such game. If you license it also under the GPL
12:16:43 <V453000> im not sure how would that correspond with ttd track layout :)
12:16:51 <planetmaker> if you use a single bit of code from OpenTTD
12:16:59 <planetmaker> then GPL is a requirement for your work
12:17:13 <Japa> Ie tracks are still locked to a grid, but if you drag a track that's not in an ortho direction, it will smoothly transition over.
12:17:17 <Japa> planetmaker, that's the plan
12:18:08 <V453000> problem is there are multiple options how to build such track??
12:18:18 <planetmaker> thus if you comply with GPL, any derivative you make is 100% kosher
12:20:22 <planetmaker> Japa, but I wonder what parts of the code you could actually re-use for such project
12:20:43 *** glx is now known as Guest6906
12:21:27 <Japa> V453000, there are multiple options, yes, but I'm sticking with one of them :)
12:24:26 <Japa> planetmaker, admitedly not very much, probably, but I'd like to leave the option anyway. Mainly it'd be things involving game rules, income, stuff like that. I don't want it to feel too different from OTTD when playing.
12:25:26 <V453000> no pixel art = no ttd :)
12:27:32 <dihedral> V453000, 3d does not exclude pixel art
12:29:27 <glx> not that much pixels but the style is there
12:29:45 <glx> of course minecraft is the best example :)
12:30:35 *** ntoskrnl has joined #openttd
12:31:44 * roboboy wonders if (O)TTD(P) should announce Workers Celebrate for freight rather than Citizens Celebrate
12:35:53 <Xaroth|Work> Local government celebrates for more incoming tax revenues
12:37:17 <V453000> Environmental Movements Rage! First oil tanker arrives to <dock>
12:37:32 <V453000> might make me start using ships
12:38:23 <glx> why complain when it arrives ?
12:38:36 <Xaroth|Work> environmentalists
12:38:42 <glx> the main problem is when it fails to arrive
12:39:45 <planetmaker> depends on the definition of 'fail to arrive'. Even some arrivals might not be welcome. Like those where the ship comes in pieces ;-)
12:40:01 <juzza1> Workers receive new shoes! Coffee production increased by 50%! (if using FIRS and heart of darkness)
12:40:32 <glx> let's add ship collision detection and oil spill
12:40:43 <planetmaker> "Soylent green ratios increased for peasants. Production of plantation doubled!"
12:42:07 <roboboy> Citizens revolt as ship owned by Costa Cruise lines passes by
12:42:35 <MNIM> "New goods arrived! people squeal with joy as the postman brings them packets from their favourite post-order companies!"
12:42:57 <MNIM> roboboy: well, those don't pass by much
12:45:41 <MNIM> Or "Local goverment falls! A parliamentary investigation starts as the newly arrived AnsaldoBreda train appears full of faults"
13:12:04 *** montalvo has joined #openttd
13:23:10 *** Alberth has joined #openttd
13:23:10 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Alberth
13:38:26 <Japa> All curves are sections of either circles or ovals.
13:43:04 <planetmaker> Japa, seems they don't have any relations to tiles anymore
13:47:35 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Well, they all start and end in the middle of tiles (which is half the density of OTTD, but perhaps they're sub-tiles)
13:47:53 <V453000> I dont see the ttd feel :>
13:49:03 *** Hendrick has joined #openttd
13:49:07 <planetmaker> I have some doubt whether it's feasible to make openttd not-sprite-based. But maybe some sprites can be generated on the fly... though... meh, cpu time :-)
13:49:34 <Pinkbeast> This might work in 32bpp land but surely never in the pixel art world?
13:49:47 <Alberth> if you drop all newgrfs, it might work :)
13:50:51 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: number of bits in the sprites has nothing to do with being sprite-based
13:51:10 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: I am well aware of that, thanks.
13:51:46 <Japa> Yeah, the way I made it, all tracks begin and end in the center of tile edges, the same way Openttd does it, though it looks rather sparse because I used 25m tiles, and realistic track dimensions.
13:51:46 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: ok, then I don't understand who you are reacting to
13:52:23 <Pinkbeast> "maybe some sprites can be generated on the fly" - in 32bpp land they might look OK, in 8bpp pixel art land I expect they'd look revolting
13:52:41 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: ah, ok. Good point
13:53:10 <planetmaker> Japa, openttd tiles have no length which relates to any real-world unit
13:53:26 <planetmaker> nor do I think you will manage anything like that
13:53:29 <V453000> I almost feel the ttd
13:53:31 <Pinkbeast> Japa: Such a thing might also want to enforce a restriction against S-shaped curves, if you're feeling ambitious
13:53:43 <planetmaker> thus: free yourself of any notion to make anything to a chosen scale
13:54:29 <Alberth> I always keep the "fun" scale as high as possible!
13:54:45 <planetmaker> good choice, Alberth !
13:55:13 <retro|cz> fun is the reason why we all are here
13:56:47 <retro|cz> if you know what I mean
13:56:54 <V453000> no some people are here because realism!
13:57:51 <Japa> I just want a train game that's both fun to play, but also gives nice eyecandy.
13:58:14 <V453000> openttd gives very nice eyecandy
13:58:33 <Japa> It's a type of eyecandy, but not necessarily the type I want.
13:58:49 <Pinkbeast> Er but that's because some people enjoy realism and think it's fun
13:58:58 <planetmaker> Japa, then get modelling and improve zbase. Create sprites for it
13:59:27 <V453000> someone so dumb couldnt exist Pinkbeast
13:59:59 <planetmaker> all sprites in zbase are based on renders in blender from 3D objects
14:00:17 <planetmaker> if you know that stuff, it's moderately easy to improve things there
14:00:43 <planetmaker> if you don't know that stuff, then the project you start undertaking will not look nice either
14:00:52 <planetmaker> due to a lack of models
14:01:06 <planetmaker> and textures / graphics
14:01:14 <Japa> Yeah, that is sadly true.
14:02:00 <V453000> and/or you could get some practice while trying to improve zbase
14:02:28 <planetmaker> while having some really fast feedback on how the stuff looks ingame
14:03:14 <Japa> Also, unlike some, I really enjoyed RCT3
14:03:37 <V453000> well you wont get your game going if you wont have any graphics anyway :)
14:04:01 <V453000> and relying that someone else will do it for you is quite dangerous for the health of the project imo
14:04:37 <Pinkbeast> cough murmur shades of P1sim
14:07:37 <Alberth> a commercial game being developed by smallfly
14:09:38 <Japa> Realistically, I'll probably just end up with something close to a virual train set, with little or no gameplay at all.
14:10:00 <retro|cz> looks like crap, anyone played that p1sim?
14:10:47 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: I think I might disagree about "being developed"
14:11:38 <Alberth> retro|cz: nope, it's not finished yet
14:12:05 <Japa> Alberth, he's saying that he's not ever working on it
14:12:57 <Alberth> Japa: ok, could be, I just look at the pictures. I don't believe it will ever be finished in a satisfactory way
14:18:58 <planetmaker> Japa, even while you're a programmer, you could learn to use blender ;-)
14:19:54 <V453000> a couple of tutorials and you know what is up
14:19:55 <planetmaker> and you coud put your programming skills to use in improving those pieces of OpenTTD code which... are promising to modify, improve and without throwing away 10 years of work by dozens of people on that code ;-)
14:20:24 <Japa> I do it for work, and really don't like using it otherwise
14:22:08 <planetmaker> you do use 3ds max for work but don't want to use it in your free time?
14:22:14 <planetmaker> Not even to make the game you want? :D
14:22:29 <Zuu> If you don't like 3ds max, get blender? :-)
14:23:38 <V453000> I honestly dont understand how does one get to work with 3d stuff if they dont like it but :D
14:24:33 <Japa> I liked it before I started using it for work
14:24:38 <planetmaker> all I can say: I can offer some cpu time. if it runs under linux and the result is CC-BY or GPL licensed ;-)
14:24:59 <planetmaker> as I recently looked it up: 3ds max doesn't qualify there
14:25:29 <V453000> blender is easy to switch to
14:28:55 <planetmaker> anyway, whatever you do, Japa, make sure you have fun doing so :-)
14:29:05 <planetmaker> and use the tools you're comfortable with
14:29:33 <retro|cz> planetmaker, you're not MIT or BSD or zlib (used in OpenTTD AFAIK) fan?
14:30:15 <planetmaker> ah, you mean with the CPU time?
14:30:32 <planetmaker> yeah, you probably can talk me into anything licensed under an OSI-approved one
14:30:37 *** mindlesstux has joined #openttd
14:31:39 <planetmaker> they didn't get approval yet ;-)
14:31:49 <planetmaker> wonder if they applied :D
14:32:49 <planetmaker> retro|cz, but as OpenTTD itself is GPL it's IMHO the license of choice in this universe
14:33:20 <retro|cz> planetmaker, do you know non-free JSON license?
14:34:12 <planetmaker> and tbh, I'm interested in stuff being licensed such that it can be used in other projects and continued easily.
14:35:02 <retro|cz> He added "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil" to MIT.
14:35:59 <retro|cz> 1:45 is funny moment
14:36:35 <planetmaker> Of course. Everyone can make his or her own license...
14:36:50 <Pinkbeast> ... but as a rule don't because you'll get it wrong somehow
14:39:53 <V453000> some whoreshit Simuscape uses from now
15:24:00 *** valhallasw has joined #openttd
15:28:16 *** Progman has joined #openttd
15:31:00 *** Prof_Frink has joined #openttd
15:36:31 <alluke> how is the semi-transparent station roof glass made?
15:42:13 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
15:42:16 <peter1138> For 8bpp, it's in the newgrf specs. For 32bpp, you can just use alpha.
15:43:18 <peter1138> The.. newgrf specs...
15:44:20 <planetmaker> and drawing. It's using the appropriate recolour sprite on the real sprites
15:44:24 <peter1138> Hmm, well, what are you actually asking? I guess you could be "making" it by placing a station at least 2 tiles wide and, if I remember correctly, at least 2 tiles long.
15:45:48 <alluke> id need semi-transparent piece on a vehicle
15:46:49 <peter1138> Well vehicles are not stations.
15:47:04 <alluke> it works on stations only?
15:47:09 <peter1138> Yes, stations only.
15:47:23 <alluke> need to find another way
15:47:40 <peter1138> The only way is to use alpha with 32bpp.
15:47:57 <alluke> i guess i must go full transparent
15:48:46 <Alberth> no worries when you see pax moving through air, they are just standing at a transparent mobile station!
15:48:52 <planetmaker> vehicle windows usually are 0% transparent
15:49:16 <alluke> well im making a convertible
15:49:17 *** TWerkhoven has joined #openttd
15:50:01 <alluke> and in --- view the other side windows are seen trough the invisible roof
15:50:27 <Alberth> planetmaker: such a station could be useful in reducing stopping time at stations
15:50:50 <Pinkbeast> alluke: I confess I fail to understand why the other side windows can't just be drawn
15:51:28 <planetmaker> Alberth, I'm thinking of something like a polonaise or hiking group :-)
15:51:33 <peter1138> Yeah, vehicles are one sprite per view anyway, there's no combining going on.
15:51:34 <alluke> it might look like the vehicle has another row of windows above the other
15:51:36 <planetmaker> v=6km/h. Capacity 1000.
15:53:01 <planetmaker> hm, that would actually be an awesome vehicle: virtually no purchase and maintenance costs. But people pay you to get from A to B :D
15:53:48 <planetmaker> definitely one of the things which need closer investigation ;-)
15:54:44 <Pinkbeast> alluke: Surely the effect would be exactly the same if one was looking through a x% transparent roof as if the pixels were drawn slightly darker
16:01:59 *** TheMask96 has joined #openttd
16:13:34 *** Pensacola has joined #openttd
16:17:58 *** abchirk_ has joined #openttd
16:19:42 <Japa> What do people here use for pixel art?
16:21:18 <Japa> That has little to no palette support, thoug
16:22:55 <LordAro> Japa: whatever comes to hand, i guess (probably gimp in most cases)
16:23:04 <LordAro> not that i actually know :p
16:32:11 <peter1138> Hmm, apparently I can do 30 bpp, but I use DVI which is only 24 bpp :(
16:32:23 <peter1138> If I used VGA... Haha...
16:35:20 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
16:40:15 *** ntoskrnl11 has joined #openttd
16:41:15 <SpComb> peter1138: using a VGA-DVI converter in between!
16:58:26 <planetmaker> retro|cz, MS Paint has issues with palettes. So... (I use gimp, others photoshop, yet others other programmes)
16:59:03 <Japa> If I'm spriting a real-world loco and carriage set, and both are differently colored in real life, is it better to just make them both the same company color, or to leave one or the other in a fixed color?
16:59:39 <Pinkbeast> Japa: Convention seems to be to add a parameter to the grf to switch between company colours and "real" liveries.
16:59:51 <Pinkbeast> Japa: If not doing that, I recommend sticking to company colours.
16:59:59 <planetmaker> your choice. Some sets go for "realistic". Others use game's company colours where in real-world are also company colours
17:00:04 <Japa> Loco and carriage in question
17:01:35 *** Djohaal has joined #openttd
17:01:39 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
17:01:44 <DorpsGek> andythenorth: danmack was last seen in #openttd 19 hours, 26 minutes, and 43 seconds ago: <DanMacK> yeah, works good
17:01:55 *** andythenorth has left #openttd
17:02:25 <Pinkbeast> Japa: This is going to be a random question, but given the image, you don't happen to read any Indian languages, do you?
17:02:52 <Japa> I read bengali really slowly, but don't understand much of it.
17:03:14 <Pinkbeast> Japa: What a marvellous coincidence! I wonder if you could do me a favour, if it is easy.
17:05:12 *** DanMacK has joined #openttd
17:06:55 <Alberth> you missed andy by 4 minutes :(
17:07:12 <Pinkbeast> Japa: (indeed, I am only presuming that that is an obituary in Bengali)
17:08:04 <Japa> I see a 24, a 1940, and a 1956
17:08:27 <Japa> I need to figure out the surrounding words to see what each is
17:09:11 <Pinkbeast> Japa: Oooh, thanks.
17:10:44 <Pinkbeast> Maybe a 2003 coming when he died?
17:14:10 *** oskari89 has joined #openttd
17:14:26 <Pinkbeast> Japa: OK, thanks. You've answered the main question - thanks awfully.
17:17:22 <Japa> সুফি, দেবাশিস সেন - Sufi, Debasisa Sen
17:17:29 <Japa> That's the title of the page
17:17:36 <Japa> Which I assume is the guy's name
17:17:48 <Pinkbeast> Debasisa Sen we think is the author
17:18:25 <Pinkbeast> "Sufi" is a pen name of this chap.
17:18:25 <Japa> I don't know enough bengali to translate it
17:18:33 <Pinkbeast> And thanks for transcribing the author's name
17:18:51 <Pinkbeast> Nah, that's fine. I just wanted to check someone wasn't pulling a fast one on me by giving me some random document in Bengali
17:18:57 <alluke> what color should headlights be when vehicle itself is yellow?
17:19:01 <Pinkbeast> ... and specifically that it mentioned 1940
17:20:10 <Pinkbeast> alluke: Well, the headlights are white on modern trains with yellow noses and LED lighting.
17:20:19 <Pinkbeast> Japa: That seems right. Thanks again.
17:20:55 <Pinkbeast> I'd still have them white; headlights do look white at night, even incandescent bulbs
17:21:07 <Japa> Google translate has an onscreen bengali keyboard if you really want to know what something says, and are very patient
17:22:41 <Japa> Pinkbeast, the only other 4 digit number on there is 1375, in the image caption
17:23:07 <Pinkbeast> Japa: I suspect this isn't actually an obit. :-/
17:24:07 *** tokai|mdlx has joined #openttd
17:25:46 <DanMacK> So... trying to open a TTDP scenario with no newgrfs and it crashes... that make sense?
17:26:24 <oskari89> Scenario format may have changed in some point
17:26:37 <frosch123> DanMacK: remove all newgrf from newgrf settings in main menu
17:26:51 <frosch123> ottd will just apply them blindly
17:27:24 <frosch123> hmm, actually, maybe we removed that
17:27:37 <DanMacK> 10 years in the community and I still make dumb mistakes
17:27:58 <frosch123> i think we removed it for real ttd/too saves, not for ttdp ones then
17:44:08 <Djohaal> are newGRFs editable anyhow?
17:44:27 <planetmaker> someone has to programme them. So... yes
17:45:17 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: That is true, but they might or might not come to the end user in a compiled form which is effectively obfuscated, and perhaps that is what Djohaal is asking.
17:45:18 <planetmaker> but they're as editable as any source code is editable: you edit it. And then you compile it to obtain the binary result to be used
17:45:22 <DorpsGek> Commit by translators :: r25779 /trunk/src/lang (luxembourgish.txt polish.txt) (2013-09-17 17:45:18 UTC)
17:45:23 <DorpsGek> -Update from WebTranslator v3.0:
17:45:24 <DorpsGek> luxembourgish - 3 changes by Phreeze
17:45:25 <DorpsGek> polish - 5 changes by wojteks86
17:45:34 <Djohaal> Pinkbeast: yes that was my point
17:45:57 <Djohaal> I'd like to fine tune some stuff on a couple of packs I have
17:46:30 <Pinkbeast> Djohaal: I honestly have no idea about source availability for typical newGRFs, save that andythenorth's seem to be available.
17:48:28 <planetmaker> check their license. If they're GPL, source must be available. And the readme or description must tell where
17:49:28 <Djohaal> i'm sorting out some butthurt with certain types of vehicles not being available after far 2050
17:49:32 <Djohaal> they get phased out but have no replacements
17:49:51 <planetmaker> simply play with 'vehicles never expire' turned on?
17:50:35 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: "If they're GPL, source must be available" - not so if it doesn't build on the work of others (although the author would be demented to so release it)
17:50:52 *** gelignite has joined #openttd
17:51:18 <Djohaal> planetmaker: yeah that is the easy solution, but it makes trains from different timeframes available and that whacks up balance to the other end of the spectrum - too easy.
17:51:21 <planetmaker> your understanding is wrong, Pinkbeast. Read the license
17:51:21 <V453000> Djohaal: try NUTS unrealistic train set :P solves
17:51:28 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No, it isn't.
17:51:34 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: You can't violate your own copyright.
17:52:06 <planetmaker> you're violating the contract you signed in distributing it. You're then obliged to give it to the user
17:52:29 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Who does the author have a contract with?
17:52:45 <planetmaker> you can't be sued for copyright infringement, sure. But the license is a contract between the user and the person distributing it
17:52:53 <planetmaker> which happens to be you
17:52:55 <Alberth> me, if I use his data
17:53:13 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: No. The GPL applies when you go to redistribute something.
17:53:28 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Right. Have you actually _read_ the GPL?
17:53:28 <planetmaker> it's a legal binding contract
17:53:44 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: You do not have to agree to the provisions of the GPL to receive a work under it.
17:53:48 <Djohaal> I usually release my license under the "do wahtever the fuck you want" license
17:54:01 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, yes. But if I do, I have the right to obtain the source
17:54:10 <planetmaker> thus the person I got it from is obliged to give it to me
17:54:12 *** LordAro has joined #openttd
17:54:17 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Not if it's the original author.
17:54:37 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: copyright has nothing to do with the license
17:54:49 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: Please can I do one lot of incomprehension at once.
17:55:10 <Pinkbeast> Copyright has everything to do with the licence because the GPL kicks in when you try to redistribute things.
17:55:24 <Pinkbeast> Yes. Please actually read it.
17:55:26 <planetmaker> the license just states under which conditions you may use my intelectual property
17:55:35 <planetmaker> trust me, I read it dozens of times
17:55:45 <Pinkbeast> OK, please comprehend it.
17:55:55 <planetmaker> b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
17:56:10 <planetmaker> thus if I distribute *my* work, I'm bound to that paragraph
17:56:21 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No, you aren't. Who is your contract with?
17:56:34 <TWerkhoven> the people you distribute to?
17:56:34 <planetmaker> you. If you use my work and agree to the license
17:56:54 <juzza1> it is inverse copyright
17:57:00 <Pinkbeast> Wrong! A contract cannot exist in that case because there is no exchange of value.
17:57:09 <planetmaker> it's not about copyright at all. It's a contract
17:57:34 <Xaroth|Work> A contract has nothing to do about exchange of value
17:57:36 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, so... all open source software has no value? Kinda wrong
17:57:45 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: I didn't say that, of course.
17:58:12 <Pinkbeast> Xaroth|Work: Yes, it has. It's basic contract law; for a contract to exist, there must be some exchange of value. Both parties must do something or give something.
17:58:26 <Xaroth|Work> that's got little to do with value
17:58:27 <planetmaker> Just face it: a license is a contract. You sign it as author. And a user may accept it, then the deal is signed
17:58:47 <Xaroth|Work> Knowledge cannot be defined a value, at least not always
17:58:47 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No, that is not the situation here.
17:58:48 <planetmaker> and then you as author have the obligation from the license as does the user
17:58:55 <Xaroth|Work> yet a NDA is a legally binding contract
17:58:58 <planetmaker> exactly that's how licenses work, Pinkbeast :-)
17:59:02 <planetmaker> talk to your lawer
17:59:07 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No. You're wrong on two counts, so far.
17:59:23 <Xaroth|Work> you're both wrong on one count tbqfh
17:59:26 <Pinkbeast> Xaroth|Work: Yes. One party gets access to material; the other gets an agreement not to disclose that material.
18:00:24 <blathijs> I actually think that, for the purpose of this discussion, the GPL is not a contract between the distributor of code/binay and the user of it, but between the author of code and a re-distributor (which, without the license/contract is not allowed to redistribute the code, or something based on it, because of copyright).
18:00:33 <Pinkbeast> blathijs: Precisely correct.
18:00:34 <Xaroth|Work> I agree with blathijs
18:00:41 <Xaroth|Work> mainly because I was half-way in writing that same line :|
18:01:39 <blathijs> So only the author of (part of) the code can actually enforce the GPL. If all code is written by the same person, then nobody else can force them to abide by the terms of the GPL, AFAIU
18:01:44 <planetmaker> as anyone can be re-distributor, it, it's about what I said...
18:02:04 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No, because if you don't redistribute you are not bound by the GPL.
18:03:46 <blathijs> I actually think that, if a newgrf is distributed under GPL but does not make source available, this effectively prevents anyone else from redistributing the newgrf since they will fail to produce the source
18:03:58 <Pinkbeast> blathijs: That is also my understanding, yes.
18:04:16 <Pinkbeast> (thank God, _someone_ else has actually understood it)
18:04:34 <blathijs> So if a newgrf is uploaded under the GPL license to say, bananas (not sure if this was the topic of the discussion, though) without making source available, bananas could not redistribute it
18:05:45 <V453000> wtf? isnt that the same as if the author uploaded it to anywhere else?
18:05:58 <Pinkbeast> V453000: "anywhere else" could also not distribute it, yes.
18:06:11 <Pinkbeast> "You are not required to agree to anything to merely use software which is licensed under the GPL. You only have obligations if you modify or distribute the software."
18:06:18 <Pinkbeast> Straight from the GNU project.
18:06:31 <V453000> that is for the user and distributor yes
18:06:41 <V453000> doesnt say anything about author
18:06:58 <Pinkbeast> V453000: One thing at a time. I'm dealing with this idea that an end-user who does not redistribute is bound by the GPL.
18:06:59 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, exactly. And the author obviously *does* distribute it, no?
18:07:13 <TrueBrain> blathijs: in fact, if that holds, the author about be wrong, as our ToS explicitly grants us permission for distribution :D
18:07:19 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: One thing at a time. Do you now agree that an end-user is not bound by the GPL?
18:07:23 <TrueBrain> so if what you say holds, nobody can upload anything GPL to BaNaNaS ;)
18:07:32 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, I *never* disputed that
18:07:33 <Pinkbeast> TrueBrain: If the source is not available, no.
18:07:36 <planetmaker> you should learn to listen
18:07:49 <TrueBrain> about? would. typing is hard :D
18:07:56 <Pinkbeast> "the license is a contract between the user and the person distributing it"
18:08:11 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: There you are arguing that the user is bound by the GPL.
18:08:33 <planetmaker> I didn't: [19:56] <planetmaker> Just face it: a license is a contract. You sign it as author. And a user may accept it, then the deal is signed
18:08:52 <alluke> V453000: why do you want toyland into ogfx+ industries so bad
18:08:54 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: There you are also arguing that the user is bound by the GPL, yes.
18:09:03 <planetmaker> I say he may accept it.
18:09:18 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: OK, let's let your selective memory slip.
18:09:19 <alluke> imo toyland and other climates are two different worlds
18:09:22 <blathijs> TrueBrain: Well, a sole author can always give bananas extra rights, like through the ToS. For a multi-author GPL-licensed newgrf, things might be more complicated..
18:09:26 <alluke> one realistic and one unrealistic
18:09:32 <V453000> alluke: who cares about your opinion?
18:09:44 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: The GPL cannot impose conditions on the author because the author already has the right to modify and distribute anything they wrote.
18:09:53 <alluke> why should anyone care about your opinion too then? :P
18:10:01 <TrueBrain> blathijs: honestly, if you distribute graphics under GPL, there is a shit-can of other trouble
18:10:14 <V453000> I didnt say any opinion now :)
18:10:15 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, yes. But if a user obtained a GPL licensed download. The author is bound to honour it.
18:10:23 <TrueBrain> GPL should only be used on code, nothing else :)
18:10:29 <planetmaker> That does NOT mean that he cannot offer it also under other licenses or none at all
18:10:43 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No, they aren't. Whose copyright would be violated?
18:11:00 <planetmaker> it doesn't mean he can only use his code under GPL. But it does mean that he has to provide people with the source to GPL licensed downloads
18:11:07 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No, still completely wrong.
18:11:11 <planetmaker> no copyright. But a license is a contract
18:11:17 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: distribution is not copyright
18:11:46 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: I have no idea what that means and I'm only doing one incomprehension at once.
18:11:50 <blathijs> planetmaker: I think your argument might hold if one would get both parties to sign the terms of the GPL as a legally binding contract. However, commonly, the GPL is not intended as a contract defended by contract law, but as a grant of license defended by copyright law
18:12:09 <planetmaker> blathijs, sure it is. That's the point of a license
18:12:27 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: The GPL says that if A wishes to distribute B's work they must agree to do so under conditions XYZ. The case you're talking about is where B is distributing B's work. The GPL says nothing about that.
18:12:27 <planetmaker> it's a blue print, so that you don't have to make individual contracts
18:12:48 <planetmaker> that's wrong, Pinkbeast
18:12:54 <planetmaker> I quoted you the passage. 3b
18:13:05 <blathijs> planetmaker: I see your point about the GPL being a contract, but I'm not so sure it works that way. I'm sure it is not _intended_ to work that way, and IANAL so don't really know if the GPL as a contract would hold up in court (which is of course the only real measure of these things)
18:13:08 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: copyright is about who owns the work, which is by definition the author. distribution is about the rules that holds when you distribute the work, both concepts are unrelated
18:13:10 *** Hendrick has joined #openttd
18:13:13 <planetmaker> If I got a binary as GPL, I have the right to request the source
18:13:31 <planetmaker> and then the author, even if the original, has to honour that license
18:13:46 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: No, they're not unrelated because you can't distribute without permission from the copyright holder.
18:13:50 <V453000> what happens if the source does not exist anymore?
18:13:55 <blathijs> planetmaker: But I think the GPL does not impose anything on the distributor of code in the distributor - user relation, only on the user in case of re-distribution
18:14:17 <V453000> Pinkbeast: once something is under open license which allows redistribution, author has nothing to talk into allowing redistribution
18:14:27 <blathijs> and everyone that distributes GPL software has been the "user" in that relation at some point - except the original author
18:14:54 <Pinkbeast> V453000: No, they can (as in the GPLed case) have imposed conditions under which it can be done and take action later if it is done under different conditions.
18:15:01 * blathijs has got to leave this intereting discussion now, will read up the backlog later :-)
18:15:19 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: The invocation of 3b is wrong. 3. starts "You may copy and distribute the Program ..."
18:15:23 <Alberth> Pinkbeast, yes, he defines the rules for distribution, but doesn't imply he is not bound by them
18:15:24 <planetmaker> blathijs, I'm quite sure, if you distribute binaries, you are liable to provide source if asked for. Just usually you distribute unmodified and thus you can point to the author's or project's web page
18:15:57 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: But the author doesn't need permission from the GPL to copy or distribute the program. They have such rights already.
18:16:11 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: if I wrote something, I cannot distribute it under the GPL license, and ask 1 euro to get the source code
18:16:17 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: Yes, you can.
18:16:38 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: That is absolutely permitted and if you give me a minute I'll find the GNU FAQ saying you can.
18:16:44 *** gelignite has joined #openttd
18:16:47 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, sure, I don't need to. But once I do, then I need to provide source upon request
18:16:49 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: _but_ I can pay the Euro and then give the source to everyone else in the world.
18:17:10 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, not. Unless you're allowed by contract or license
18:17:18 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: "once I do" - no, the author will never need permission under the GPL, because they're the author.
18:17:31 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: It's GPLed, remember?
18:17:36 <planetmaker> he does not need permission. I always say that. Please understand that.
18:17:48 <planetmaker> But he is *obliged* to provide source, *if* he distributes under GPL
18:17:56 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: If they don't need permission they have no need to comply with the conditions of 3b.
18:18:21 <planetmaker> but every user has the right to request source. Thus the author has the obligation to provide. Simple
18:18:55 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Every user has the right to request source from the person who distributed it to them, because the person who distributed it to them had no right to distribute it at all except under the GPL.
18:19:03 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: ... unless that person is the author!
18:20:42 <planetmaker> so what point is the GPL if the author is not bound to it?
18:20:55 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Because all redistributors are bound by it.
18:21:14 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: And in _practice_, releasing under the GPL without source is useless.
18:21:25 <planetmaker> please ask your attorney about contracts. You'll find that you're in the wrong here :-)
18:21:27 <Pinkbeast> You'd never pick the GPL if you wanted to do that; it makes no sense.
18:30:02 <Pinkbeast> Er, I think this idea that a contract imposes the same conditions on both parties is one of many errors, for one thing.
18:30:50 <planetmaker> no, it defines exactly which conditions apply to which party.
18:30:57 <planetmaker> There's a distributor. And a recipient
18:31:10 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Wrong again.
18:31:12 <planetmaker> Incidentially the author can also act as distributor, thus is bound by the terms for that
18:31:30 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: No, because the "You" of the GPL is someone who does not otherwise have permission to distribute it.
18:31:54 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: But the GPL is never an agreement between distributor and recipient.
18:32:17 <Pinkbeast> It's an agreement between distributor and copyright holder.
18:32:40 <Pinkbeast> It cannot, therefore, apply when those two parties are the same; you cannot enter into a contract with yourself.
18:37:54 <peter1138> planetmaker, given up? :D
18:38:23 <planetmaker> no point to argue with a person who doesn't read really
18:38:34 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: I've just very clearly explained why you are mistaken.
18:39:00 <planetmaker> you've explained why something is wrong what you think I said, but what I didn't argue
18:39:15 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Do you agree that the GPL is an agreement between distributor and copyright holder" ?
18:40:41 <peter1138> It's an agreement between someone who wishes to modify/distribute and someone who has modified/distributed.
18:40:54 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: OK, that's the error.
18:41:22 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: Someone who has distributed, but is not the original author, has no right to authorise someone else to distribute.
18:41:34 <peter1138> They do, because it's given by the GPL.
18:41:51 <peter1138> But only under the same conditions, i.e. still under the GPL.
18:41:52 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: No, the GPL does not convey a right to authorise others to distribute.
18:42:08 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: You will not be able to point to any part of the GPL that conveys such a right.
18:42:34 *** Progman has joined #openttd
18:43:12 <peter1138> "You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force."
18:43:34 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: Yes. That grants a right to use the work. It does not grant a right to authorise others to distribute the work.
18:43:50 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: Who authorises others to distribute the work? The original copyright holder.
18:44:46 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: That says that "copies or rights" are not terminated; not what they are.
18:45:11 <blathijs> Yay, we're still discussing :-)
18:45:30 <peter1138> I don't even know what the original argument was :p
18:45:54 <juzza1> I don't even know what GPL is anymore
18:46:06 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
18:46:13 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: I contend that Author A can (pointlessly) distribute a program that A wrote "under the GPL" without providing source (but then no-one else can redistribute it).
18:46:32 <peter1138> Pinkbeast, that's wrong.
18:46:48 <peter1138> Author A can distribute program A however they wish.
18:46:57 <planetmaker> he can distribute it as he likes. But *if* he choses GPL, he has to comply and provide source upon request
18:47:04 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: Yes, that's true.
18:47:08 <peter1138> If they distribute it under GPL, he MUST distribute the source if requested.
18:47:13 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: That's wrong.
18:47:26 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: Who is their agreement with that requires them to do that?
18:47:28 <peter1138> Pinkbeast, clearly not. That's the complete basic principle of the thing.
18:47:49 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: That's not really an argument. (Of course, such distribution is pointless).
18:48:21 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: But the way that principle is implemented is that someone who wants to distribute is obliged to agree to the author's conditions for doing so.
18:48:28 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: The author isn't so constrained.
18:48:35 <blathijs> Finished reading the backlog. Now let's get the text of the license and read carefully :-)
18:48:50 <peter1138> Their agreement is with the user who has obtained the program and wishes to receive the source code under the GPL.
18:49:22 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: They cannot enter into a contract with such a person, there being no exchange of value.
18:49:39 <Pinkbeast> ... and they have no reason to enter into an agreement with the user.
18:49:43 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, contracts require no value in whatever way defined to be legally binding
18:50:08 <planetmaker> you can enforce a signed contract, or a license agreement under civil law.
18:50:15 <planetmaker> that's about the same
18:51:17 <Pinkbeast> And thirdly, the "you" in the GPL is the person who wants to redistribute, not the person authorising redistribution, so it does not affect the author who is not seeking permission to redistribute.
18:51:41 <LordAro> blathijs: don't bother, get out while you still can :p
18:53:55 <blathijs> planetmaker: Reading GPLv3, section 5, I basically read a grant of permissions of an author, that says: "You are allowed to redistribute, under the condition that you provide source". For your contract argument to hold, it should have said something like "If anyone [involved in this license] every distributes the program, he or she is obliged to distribute the source as well"
18:54:19 <retro|cz> Is there any reason why I can't type for example ř ingame?
18:54:35 <Pinkbeast> blathijs: Well, there would also have to _be_ an enforceable contract, which there isn't.
18:56:10 <blathijs> planetmaker: So even if the author is bound by the license, viewed as a contract, which I'm not sure of, then the author is not obliged to distribute source. Anyone but the author will be obliged, provided they need the GPL to get the right to redistribute the work
18:57:02 <blathijs> planetmaker: I think I've read your arguments and the license carefully, or did I miss something important? :-)
19:02:59 <Djohaal> we are still discussing that license bullpoo?
19:03:13 <peter1138> It's a license, not a contract, yay.
19:04:45 <Pinkbeast> Djohaal: It is _moderately_ important that people who want to distribute stuff for OTTD actually understand the GPL (and I'm a bit alarmed, frankly).
19:05:37 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: talk to the FSF
19:05:51 <planetmaker> What does “written offer valid for any third party” mean in GPLv2? Does that mean everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no matter what?
19:06:01 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
19:06:01 <planetmaker> If you choose to provide source through a written offer, then anybody who requests the source from you is entitled to receive it.
19:06:20 <planetmaker> and that's what you do when you attach the license to your code
19:07:15 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Almost right apart from the bit where that's just explaining the provisions of the GPL which, as blathijs and I have both now explained, are not binding on the author.
19:07:42 <planetmaker> yes, you may disagree with the FSF. I choose not to. They ran it through legal ;-)
19:07:56 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: I'm not disagreeing with the FSF.
19:08:34 <blathijs> planetmaker: I'm not so sure if the FAQ still applies completely in this corner case and eventually it's the license text that is the final word, not the FAQ. Regarding the text you quoted, that says "if you choose to provide source through a written offer", which I can assume the author will not do if he chooses not provide the source at all.
19:08:59 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: In particular, that answer does not say "Yes, everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no matter what", although presumably mainly because the case under discussion is absurd.
19:09:55 <planetmaker> blathijs, but the GPL requires you to do one of three things, like section 3a-c) from gpl v2
19:09:58 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: But that is also true for other reasons; if A writes a GPLed program and distributes it to B and C and that's it, "everyone in the world" cannot get the source to that program, either.
19:10:10 <andythenorth> did I miss something? :P
19:10:16 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Yes... if you are seeking permission to redistribute GPLed software.
19:10:36 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, read. It says *distribute*. Not re-distribute
19:10:49 <andythenorth> don't introduce redistribute
19:10:52 <andythenorth> just stick to distribute
19:10:56 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: I am well aware of that, but the author does not need permission to distribute it at all.
19:11:22 <andythenorth> oh this has been going on a while
19:11:25 <andythenorth> I see from the logs :P
19:11:33 <peter1138> andythenorth, don't do it!
19:11:40 <andythenorth> how the fuck do you have a GPL argument for so long?
19:11:55 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: As said already, it's an agreement between someone who wishes to distribute and someone further up the chain (whether that's the author or not); you can't enter into an agreement with yourself so it cannot apply when the author is the distributor.
19:11:59 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, in other places they do use *redistribute*. As such, the distinction is made on purpose
19:12:31 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: So what? The author still doesn't need permission to distribute and can't enter into an agreement with themselves.
19:12:46 <planetmaker> But then he's not allowed to use the GPL
19:12:57 <planetmaker> if he doesn't want to honour it
19:13:04 <Pinkbeast> planetmaker: Er... says who?
19:13:18 <Alberth> taske it to court, and you'll see
19:13:20 <andythenorth> did I miss the bit in the logs where this is easy?
19:13:31 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: who would take who to court?
19:13:32 <planetmaker> no, andythenorth :-)
19:13:51 <blathijs> planetmaker: But still, it says "You may distributed, provided you do a, b, c". It does not say, "You cannot redistribute if you do not do a, b, c"
19:13:57 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: get the product, ask the source, get refusal, go to court
19:14:23 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: Lose, obviously, since it is impossible for you to have a contract with the author.
19:14:36 <planetmaker> blathijs, it does. It disallows redistribution if you don't follow section 2 and 3... (§6)
19:15:01 <andythenorth> you all seem to have not used the word 'convey'
19:15:10 <andythenorth> "To “convey” a work means any kind of propagation that enables other parties to make or receive copies. Mere interaction with a user through a computer network, with no transfer of a copy, is not conveying"
19:15:16 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Ah, we're in GPLv2 land
19:15:32 <andythenorth> go look up the case law in that case
19:15:39 <andythenorth> specifying also your jurisdiction
19:15:44 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: The specific hypothetical case has never come up.
19:15:46 <andythenorth> oh, there isn't much?
19:15:46 <blathijs> planetmaker: Can you quote the text that says "You may not" or equivalent?
19:16:08 <blathijs> Ah, section 4 says something like that
19:16:16 <planetmaker> 4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License
19:16:54 <andythenorth> you're trying to resolve an issue that FSF found was a problem in v2, so clarified their own term in v3
19:17:01 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Er... no, we aren't.
19:17:08 <andythenorth> I'm sure they'd appreciate an email if you solve it
19:17:10 *** TomyLobo has joined #openttd
19:17:45 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Specifically, the question is, suppose an author releases a work "under the GPL" without source. This is pointless. Can a user compel them to distribute the source (and if so, why?)
19:19:37 <andythenorth> did a license.txt accompany the distribution?
19:19:41 <andythenorth> or a rendition of same
19:19:49 <andythenorth> with GPL v2 correct text?
19:20:11 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: I suspect you're sneaking up on the wrong answer, but let's say yes.
19:20:16 <andythenorth> why is this a debate then?
19:20:39 <andythenorth> For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
19:20:39 <andythenorth> gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
19:20:41 <andythenorth> you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
19:20:42 <andythenorth> source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
19:20:42 <planetmaker> pinky thinks GPL is kinda void, if the authors doesn't want to give source
19:20:49 <andythenorth> he's smoking crack
19:20:54 <andythenorth> or he's a very clever lawyer
19:21:06 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: blathijs has worked this out, but around we go again.
19:21:13 <blathijs> planetmaker: Hmm, I actually agree that, if one would see the GPL as a contract, that section 4 and perhaps 5 might actually impose obligations on the author (though note the "might", I'm not enough of a lawyer to tell for sure). However, I still not believe the the GPL can be seen as a contract, though that is also something that's ultimately up to the courts (and not so clear-cut, see the case about the artistic license in the ...
19:21:19 <blathijs> ... softwarelaywer link I posted a while ago)
19:21:20 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: When do you have to comply with the conditions of the GPL?
19:21:49 <andythenorth> when copying, distributing and modifying
19:21:55 <andythenorth> other activities are out of scope of the license
19:22:05 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Good. Why do you have to comply with the conditions of the GPL?
19:22:08 <planetmaker> (which also the author can do, thus he binds himself to the licens)
19:22:27 <andythenorth> is there some big reveal coming? I failed to see it in the logs
19:22:45 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: "Because otherwise you have no permission to copy, distribute or modify".
19:22:49 <andythenorth> you have to comply with the conditions of the GPL because it's the license, cleverly built on fairly common copyright conventions
19:22:52 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: So... how does that apply to the author?
19:23:15 <planetmaker> the argument simply is "I'm the original and only author, I'm not obliged to honour the GPL's request to distribute sources"
19:23:32 <planetmaker> which is a strange argument to say at least
19:23:32 <blathijs> andythenorth: The main observation is that you only need to distribute source, if you want (need) the license to give you the right to distribute (which you don't need as an author)
19:24:17 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: it's enforcable in the same way that I cannot say something costs 1 euro, but require 100 euro for it
19:24:36 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: Uh... implicit conditions of sale are another matter entirely
19:24:45 <andythenorth> the only problem I can see is if the route chosen is option 2 - written offer for min. 3 years - and the chain of offers doesn't overlap
19:24:52 <andythenorth> then there's lapsed access to source
19:25:15 <andythenorth> what was the point?
19:25:40 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: That seems beside the point. What compels the author to comply, given that what compels everyone else to comply is that otherwise they'd have no permission at all?
19:25:54 <planetmaker> he wants to claim his project GPL but not distribute source ever to anyone
19:25:58 <Alberth> he claims you can refuse to give me the source, even if you say you use GPL for your code
19:26:09 <andythenorth> and he can sue you
19:26:12 <andythenorth> that's how law works
19:26:16 <andythenorth> the FSF might help
19:26:20 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Er... who is "he"?
19:26:29 <planetmaker> I can sue you for sources
19:26:35 <andythenorth> he = Alberth in this case
19:26:36 <planetmaker> As I got a license which gives me the right to them
19:26:41 <andythenorth> alberth is going to sue you
19:26:51 <blathijs> Pinkbeast: He is anyone in this case, or potentially anyone who received the work
19:27:14 <andythenorth> anyone who recieved it in correct form, with license
19:27:15 <V453000> what if I lose the source for whatever reason?
19:27:30 <Pinkbeast> But that makes no sense; there is no contract between the author and the user.
19:27:41 <peter1138> It's a license, not a contract.
19:27:52 <planetmaker> I accepted your license, though, Pinkbeast
19:27:52 <blathijs> planetmaker: Do you agree with me that, if the GPL would not hold up as a contract, then the author is not obliged to distribute source?
19:27:59 <andythenorth> it's not a contract
19:28:05 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: you don't need a contract before you can sue
19:28:19 <andythenorth> wtf is a contract even in the conversation?
19:28:31 <andythenorth> it's the thing that prevents you suing alberth for breach of copyright
19:28:32 <blathijs> Alberth: But contract breach and copyright violation are the most obvious reasons to sue in this case
19:28:38 <Pinkbeast> Well, most licences _are_ contracts, of course.
19:28:44 <planetmaker> blathijs, I don't know the details of the English words. But as far as my legal understanding goes, a license gives both, the licensee as the license giver rights and obligations. Or at least can
19:28:46 <blathijs> Alberth: And I don't think you can sue the author for copyright violation...
19:29:37 <blathijs> planetmaker: Apart from English words, I'm talking about a legally binding contract under civil law
19:29:37 <Alberth> blathijs: I'd sue him for not holding his end of the license, I don't care about his copyright
19:29:53 <andythenorth> now that amateur lawyer hour is over, here's a duck
19:29:55 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: "not holding his end of the license" isn't a thing.
19:29:56 <Alberth> his copyright means he has the right also use it in other means
19:30:03 <andythenorth> we don't have a duck in OTTD
19:30:09 <blathijs> Alberth: I actually think there is no such thing, sueing somebody for not holding up a license
19:30:12 <planetmaker> replace ufo with duck?
19:30:13 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: When you do that, that's suing for breach of contract.
19:30:27 <TWerkhoven> capacity 1 passenger
19:30:34 <blathijs> andythenorth: Your duck is slow :-p
19:30:43 <blathijs> andythenorth: It's huge, though :-D
19:30:46 <V453000> only as cargoes so far though
19:31:06 <Alberth> indeed, Nuts has ducks
19:31:20 <Alberth> Pinkbeast: whatever, I just want the source
19:31:55 <planetmaker> toy cargo, V453000 ?
19:32:05 <Pinkbeast> Alberth: Of course, but you have no basis to demand it. As blathijs points out, it can't be copyright violation (not your copyright), can't be breach of contract (no contract).
19:32:16 <V453000> uhmmm, well mainly pm ... it also has random little chance to appear elsewhere like goods
19:32:35 *** Supercheese has joined #openttd
19:32:48 <V453000> yes :) and they are coming out as engines with next release
19:35:20 <andythenorth> yeah, so re-reading the original GPL v2 text, for the author all bets are off
19:35:24 <andythenorth> author doesn't have to comply
19:35:28 <andythenorth> end of argument?
19:35:51 <planetmaker> yes, getting boring :-)
19:36:07 <andythenorth> the whole thing is based on the idea that the original author is an FSF hippy who will *of course* provide source
19:36:48 <andythenorth> and if you don't have the source, or a written offer to provide source, you can't distribute
19:36:52 <andythenorth> so the whole thing falls down
19:36:57 <andythenorth> let's stop using the GPL
19:37:19 <planetmaker> why stop? just ridicule it :-P
19:37:40 <andythenorth> stallman got it wrong
19:37:57 <LordAro> stallman, wrong? don't be ridiculous
19:38:04 <andythenorth> this does actually bork bananas
19:38:08 <andythenorth> we should stop operating it
19:38:15 <andythenorth> we could become liable for a GPL test case
19:38:24 <andythenorth> or at least we should change it
19:38:47 <andythenorth> we need accompanying source for every upload, or a written offer to provide it, or something that complies with section c
19:38:47 <planetmaker> we don't :-) read bananas TOS
19:39:04 *** Belugas has joined #openttd
19:39:04 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Belugas
19:39:44 <andythenorth> planetmaker: which clause(s)?
19:40:32 <planetmaker> You will only upload content of which you are (one of) the original author(s).
19:40:32 <planetmaker> You grant the OpenTTD team the rights to distribute the last version of your content from a central server. We will assign a globally unique identifier to each upload and everyone can download the content when they know that identifier.
19:40:57 <andythenorth> ...there's no written offer to provide source OR accompanying full source
19:41:02 <andythenorth> so we can't comply with GPL
19:41:14 <andythenorth> section 3 of GPL v2
19:41:17 <planetmaker> you can only grant that, if you have that right. And make sure that it still complies to GPL
19:41:44 <andythenorth> planetmaker: we can't be sure that we can comply
19:41:58 <planetmaker> the uploader has to make sure
19:41:59 <andythenorth> we must have 3.a, 3.b or 3.c "Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code."
19:42:16 <andythenorth> who's distributing? Us or the uploader?
19:42:22 <V453000> Alberth: 4 more to go :D
19:42:23 <andythenorth> are we just a transmission network?
19:42:37 <andythenorth> Pinkbeast and blathijs
19:43:06 <Alberth> V453000: yeah, except you are going to be faster in adding new ones than me in finding them :)
19:43:48 <andythenorth> Pinkbeast: was your original point that Bananas isn't GPL compliant currently?
19:44:14 <planetmaker> no, the discussion was pointless from the start ;-)
19:45:30 <TinoDidriksen> Bananas doesn't have to be. It's not you packaging or curating the stuff. Just as uploading a GPL binary to a random FTP does not magically cause the FTP owner to be legally liable.
19:46:35 <andythenorth> ToS grant the right to distribute
19:46:40 <andythenorth> therefore we are a distributor
19:47:07 <andythenorth> also I need to go get a lot of source from other newgrf authors :(
19:47:12 <andythenorth> my grfs are GPL violations
19:47:53 <andythenorth> one of you here should sue me
19:48:02 <TinoDidriksen> No. Bananas is the pipe; the distributor is the uploader. It would be different if you had an approval or signing process, such as Appstore.
19:48:21 <frosch123> andythenorth: yeah, i demand a copy of your brain
19:48:28 <frosch123> i heard it is the source of most of that stuff
19:48:41 <frosch123> also one of the hands maybe?
19:50:00 <andythenorth> mostly the right
19:50:02 <andythenorth> except when typing
19:50:05 <andythenorth> or using modifier keys
19:51:50 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: No, I wasn't saying anything about Bananas. I mentioned the case of the insane no-source author as an illustration only, in passing. (Oops).
19:53:17 <Djohaal> why am I getting stuttering animation on those patchpacks with the AA filter
19:53:27 <TinoDidriksen> Authors can't be held to an OSS license. They're redistribution licenses.
19:53:54 <andythenorth> you're probably correct
19:54:32 <andythenorth> if I was to challenge it, I'd probably go after the person who is the distributor
19:54:35 <andythenorth> rather than the author
19:54:47 <andythenorth> it so happens that the initial distributor will *always* be one of the authors
19:54:55 <andythenorth> but that's just a little point
19:57:06 <andythenorth> you have caused me to discover that all my grf licences are invalid though
19:57:23 <andythenorth> and that we need to modify or shut down bananas
19:57:28 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Aren't you the author, though? :-/
19:57:36 <andythenorth> wtf does that have to do with it?
19:57:58 <Pinkbeast> I think the point of the discussion was "the author can do as they please, caveat redistributor"
19:58:03 *** DanMacK has joined #openttd
19:58:48 <andythenorth> Pinkbeast: the author can do as they please
19:58:52 <andythenorth> the distributor can't
19:59:12 <andythenorth> so as long as you have count(distributed_copies) == 0
19:59:19 <andythenorth> you can do as you please
20:00:00 <Pinkbeast> Uh, no, I think the author can always do as they please (it might be nice not to drop distributors in it, though)
20:00:55 <TinoDidriksen> Author cannot be held to a FOSS / OSI license...the licenses are for redistribution.
20:01:29 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Supposing you're the sole author (which ahem cough) you can't violate your own copyright.
20:01:46 <TinoDidriksen> The receiver of GPL code must agree to the license - the author never enters into the picture.
20:02:03 <Pinkbeast> TinoDidriksen: Ah... the receiver _if_ they wish to modify etc etc (I know you know this)
20:02:53 <andythenorth> you could be right
20:02:59 <andythenorth> but if I had to go to court over it
20:03:06 <TinoDidriksen> We are right. See MySQL.
20:03:10 <andythenorth> I would still go after the 'author as distributor'
20:03:22 <andythenorth> is there actual case law?
20:03:30 *** LordAro has joined #openttd
20:03:57 <TinoDidriksen> No, since no author agreed to the contract...
20:04:12 <andythenorth> what does the MySQL judgement prove?
20:04:54 <Pinkbeast> I think Bananas is in the clear too since the author agrees to the Bananas TOS and hence is giving Bananas permission to redistribute in ways that might or might not be GPL-compliant.
20:04:56 <TinoDidriksen> No judgement, just that MySQL is one big project that's dual-licensed, 'cause as owners of the copyright they can distribute two identical but differently licensed versions.
20:05:25 <andythenorth> but still, if I want source and I recieved my copy under GPL, you can't wave your other license at me
20:05:31 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: Suppose you go after the author-as-distributor; are you alleging they breached a contract with you?
20:05:34 <andythenorth> I still don't know what I would be suing you for
20:05:52 <andythenorth> I could try and bring a case that you have put me at risk for breaching copyright?
20:06:10 <andythenorth> because you have distributed under an invalid license, or a license you never intended to honour
20:06:24 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: But you'd be arguing that I've put you at risk of violating _my_ copyright.
20:06:40 <andythenorth> so it might work if you sued me
20:06:57 <andythenorth> or if you had co-authors suing me perhaps
20:07:06 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: and I think one can show this doesn't create any sort of general obligation on the no-source author because they might have distributed it saying
20:07:08 <andythenorth> lawyers would make a lot of billable hours on it I think
20:07:22 <peter1138> andythenorth, he keeps bringing this contract word into it ;)
20:07:23 <Pinkbeast> "This is GPL but there is NO SOURCE so you can't distribute it at all" very prominently.
20:07:44 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: Yes, that's because those are the two legs of software licensing; copyright and contract law.
20:07:47 <peter1138> I'm pretty that would just count as "not GPL"
20:07:57 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: A software license is in general part of a contract.
20:08:35 <peter1138> Is a drivers license a contract?
20:08:44 <Pinkbeast> peter1138: I'm not sure why that is pertinent.
20:09:06 <andythenorth> Pinkbeast: I am happy to say I don't know what I'd sue the author for :)
20:09:21 <andythenorth> but I wouldn't want to stack a case on 'andythenorth is not lawyer' tbh
20:10:06 <andythenorth> good luck if you want to do that :)
20:10:19 <andythenorth> there are many other things I don't know about too, if you would like to pursue cases in those
20:10:47 <TinoDidriksen> I am 100% confident that the copyright holder cannot be sued over GPL violations, as GPL is not a contract but is a license that the receiver must agree to. It is not a two-way street.
20:11:13 <andythenorth> I would not fancy taking that one-liner from irc into a court
20:11:19 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: I'd quite like to sue the Jovian Moon Men
20:11:42 <andythenorth> I know that when we sold GPL software to the UK government, we kind of went into this stuff a bit
20:11:56 <andythenorth> but in the absence of case law, it's very quickly theory and hot air
20:12:01 <TinoDidriksen> If the receiver cannot abide by the GPL for whatever reason, including the author not giving him the source, the program falls under normal copyright and he simply cannot redistribute it.
20:12:17 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: I'll bet you entered into other conditions above and beyond the GPL, though?
20:12:29 <andythenorth> we had other contractual terms
20:12:33 <andythenorth> but the license was GPL
20:12:48 <andythenorth> it's a combined work
20:12:50 <andythenorth> we had no choice
20:18:31 <Pinkbeast> Apparently I already have a gamersgate account. Do I know the password?
20:19:31 <frosch123> just use the master password
20:21:05 <andythenorth> so shall we start distributing source with our grfs?
20:21:11 * andythenorth suspects it's necessary
20:21:14 <andythenorth> or a written offer
20:21:38 <andythenorth> btw, GPL is not a contract, but a written offer [probably] is under English law
20:22:57 <Pinkbeast> andythenorth: I think it's necessary that a third-party redistributor of grfs does so (save Bananas and like situations)
20:23:49 <andythenorth> ok, so if they want to make a written offer, they had better have (a) the original source to hand (b) or reliable access to it (same thing) (c ) a chain of written offers extending back to copyright holder
20:24:28 <andythenorth> and the offers are probably not cast-iron. Offers can be rescinded.
20:24:36 <andythenorth> so better just get the source eh?
20:25:12 <Pinkbeast> I think it would be jolly good if Bananas had a source tarball for every GRF under a free license, apropos of nothing much.
20:35:55 <planetmaker> bananas is not meant to provide that
20:40:23 <oskari89> Error! Assertion failed at line 1324 of ...\src\economy.ccp: v-> cargo_cap >= v-> cargo.RemainingCount()
20:40:53 <oskari89> Let's see if it does it again
20:41:34 <Rubidium> one of the typical "I have messed with NewGRFs" assertion
20:41:41 <oskari89> (NewGRF Developer i am, was expecting it on some point :) )
20:41:56 <peter1138> Rubidium, rubbish, everyone knows changing NewGRFs never breaks anything!
20:42:00 <andythenorth> try changing strings
20:42:06 <andythenorth> openttd hates you doing that in a grf :P
20:44:51 <planetmaker> hm. I seem to be unable to produce valid versions of OpenGFX. Including re-builds of previous releases
20:45:02 <oskari89> You need to remove CSDRailset and -Roadset from GRF, together with
20:45:08 <peter1138> planetmaker, GPL violation!
20:45:23 <andythenorth> peter1138: you should sue him
20:45:42 <Rubidium> planetmaker: use a fixed nmlc?
20:45:42 <planetmaker> oh, the source is the same :-)
20:45:58 <oskari89> Was there some way to "clean" scenario from newgrfs?
20:46:30 <Rubidium> don't know, but if you can't compile a valid version with the current one but you could with a previous one, then from the current one's point of view the previous one is fixed
21:02:59 <andythenorth> have fun with law :)
21:03:04 *** andythenorth has left #openttd
21:18:07 <Zuu> oskari89: As said, there is a menu entry to export a scenario to a heightmap png. Create a new scenario using this heightmap and place all towns+industries+trees etc. again.
21:18:10 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has joined #openttd
21:18:45 <Zuu> A bit of work, but I did this for the Beginner Tutorial once to safely add the manual industries NewGRF.
21:20:20 <Zuu> The main towns/industries are named the same and located at about the same spot. So it is possible not noticed by most people. Also my guess is that users of the tutorial play it once or twice and do not return to it later when there is a new version out of the tutorial.
continue to next day ⏵
