|Subject: ||Re: QuakeLives' Copyright _AND_ Tradem...|
|Date: ||1/6/00 11:04:34 AM|
Kevin Pulo wrote:
> I have written an essay which takes a blow by blow
> account of how the Quake Lives release has violated
> the GPL, providing specifics on where it's gone
> wrong. Read it at
nice discussion, but it seems to be that not including source for DirectX is not a violation of the GPL, as it is an external program that is not distributed in the same package as games.
I'll cite the discussion after section 3 of the GPL (which I'm sure you are familiar with...;)
For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the
a) DirectX is not contained by programs, and hence doesnt not get included in the definition of complete source code. Could it be termed an interface definition file? doesn't sound like it.. but.. And it is not a script used to control compilation or installation.
b) You could argue that Directx is something that is normally distributed with the windows operating system.. I'm not sure what version (if any) windows 98 comes with, but NT4 certainly does, and Windows2000 comes with directx7. Perhaps this is a "major component" ? Perhaps not, but section A still applies.
Does this make sense? I'm sorta rambling..
Jacob "case" lehrbaum