Plugin Licenses

[a]

This is a list of plugins that need licensing. This is not listed in terms of priority.
Also, what was the license we wanted to use? I forget.

Some of these forks have their own licenses which should be included in the repo. Additionally, I think GPLv3 requires a copy of the license be distributed with the binary (build server).

Don't want a DMCA on that.

* https://github.com/Civcraft/AttrHider
* https://github.com/Civcraft/Bastion
* https://github.com/Civcraft/MusterCull
* https://github.com/Civcraft/DynCap
* https://github.com/Civcraft/Burricos
* https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes
* https://github.com/Civcraft/AFK-Player-GC
* https://github.com/Civcraft/ArthropodEgg
* https://github.com/Civcraft/CivPets (Link doesn't work yet but will soonish)
* https://github.com/Civcraft/Combat-Tag (Has a license, but our repo does not include it?)
* https://github.com/Civcraft/HitAdjust (Implying shit tps doesn't make this plugin irrelevant)
* https://github.com/Civcraft/random-spawn (Also has its own license which should be included in the repo)

[justin kilpatrick]

We can't use GPL because Minecraft (well maybe we could) anyways we tend to use somthing like BSD or MIT, open source, feel free to close source it, no requirements other than inclusion of the License and perhaps attribution. 

Most of these are single or few contributor plugins, a much easier job than Citadlel or Prisonpearl, we just need their consent to add a license to the plugin. 

[Rourke750]

I believe we can use GPL because our code isnt included in the release of closed source code. (Code is loaded via external source)

[Nick]

If possible please stick with the 3-clause BSD that we generally agreed upon last year.

N

[a]

Some of the plugins we have forked are GPL'd.

Combat tag is creative common 0, so we need to check if it's okay for us to disbribute a binary of that (build server).
Random spawn is GPLv3, so we need the build server to include that license in its fork repo and for the build server to distribute a copy of the license with the compiled jars.

The rest shouldn't be problematic I think, just need to get consent from the contributers.

Excerpts from Nick's message of 2015-02-14 17:08:13 -0800:

[Dr. Andrew Jawa]

derp, fixed: Random spawn is GPLv3, so we need to include that license in its fork repo and for the build server to distribute a copy of the license with the compiled jars. 

[justin kilpatrick]

that sounds easy enough. 

[Rourke750]

We can just close our combat tag repo.  It is no longer needed. We go off the main plugin.

[ribagi]

Don't take this as legal advice or anything that will make me sue-able. 

GPLv3 is very restricted in its terms. Out of the GPLs, GPLv2 is more open. GPLv3 can force users to not use it in ways the user wants to. GPLv3 is more of a personal license if anything.

I personally use MIT in almost all of my own code. BSD 2 and BSD 3 requires the modder to post copyright notices for all contributors, while MIT does requires only the creator. BSD 3 is BSD 2 plus a no endorsement clause which prevents modders to post any comments made to their code as a way to promote the code. Pretend that Factorymod is BSD 2. If I made my own pull and change around how it does factories if ttk2 says "Wow this is cool" I can use his statement but because Factorymod is BSD 3 this means that I can't use his statement with out his permission. ISC is a nice one too, because it is short. WTFPL is also a great one too.

Licenses can be changed if all the owners of the code agrees on it. Since Factorymod is not owned by Microsoft, we can add basically any license we want.

[justin kilpatrick]

We would need to dig up lardypants as he did a lot of the factorymod code way back when. We can't add whatever license without getting consent from previous contributors. Now this is mostly just a formality since all of them created the code with the intent that it be open source at least for use by Civcraft. They might have feelings about which license we use and we will have to try and convince them otherwise or bow to that.

[gmlaxfanatic2]

Guess who was lurking around (I'm also landrypants). I unequivocally give my consent to any kind of license you want for factorymod code or any other code I have contributed to with regards to Minecraft. PM me @landrypants on reddit if you need me to make a commit signifying this or anything.

[justin kilpatrick]

lots of contributors to Factorymod but most of them only did config changes, do we need their permission to chance the liscense? probably .

[Rourke750]

We need a lawyer.

[justin kilpatrick]

we can't afraid a lawyer, law students will have to do 

[ribagi]

You don't have a lawyer or at less have contact with a lawyer? I strongly advice you to contact a lawyer to at less get a premade copyright transfer. And don't rely on students for legal advice on something that could get you sued.

[Arieh Kovler]

Config changes aren't the plugin. They're our settings for the plugin in our environment. 

[justin kilpatrick]

I did that for all the Praxis intellectual property stuff, bulletproof contract and incorporation agreement, but that's for the company to own everything about the contributed code, we just need permission to change the license from all contributors and we can do it fine for this stuff. 

Civcraft isn't even incorporated and it really really should be if I am planing on sharding. Its not even that hard.  

[Matthías Valdimarsson]

I did a crapton of config stuff for factorymod, I really doubt you need premission from config editors since the plugin functions fine without all the contributions so we're fine even if they try and be a problem.

In any case I gib permission for my config edits to be used however Justin feels like.

[justin kilpatrick]

ok that leaves a bunch of people left for factorymod, I need to sit down and email everyone. This is going to take forever. 

[Jacob Sokora]

I think we should put all Civcraft plugins under http://www.wtfpl.net/

[Mark Grandi]

RealisticBiomes i'm pretty sure is just Me and wildweasel. You can use git to print out a list of everyone whose commits have ended up in the main repo, although this is harder if changes were emailed from person X to someone like rourke who then merged the changes himself.

Anyway, I went through that list that TTK posted and ran the command, these are the people who have commits in those repos. We can probably automate this to have like, a running list of "Thanks/credits" if we wanted to!

https://gist.github.com/mgrandi/d01e12af8099fd2dfacd

~Mark

[justin kilpatrick]

ooh this is really good, now we just have to get consent from everyone for putting a license on these. 

[Space Fountain]

Question about Bastion. Since I licensed it to myself originally can I change the copy right holder without others consent? The license file has been up since practically before it was on github so anyone submitting commits would have done so while that license was up, which might qualify as consent or possibly waving of their rights to the work? Anyway I’ll certainly be will to accept most any license that we end up coming up with for it.

[justin kilpatrick]

That might mean you can chose to relicense it without their consent. By default everyone is assumed to own their own code. But if there is a license up  at the time of their submission they are assumed to have agreed to the terms.

[Dr. Andrew Jawa]

Gordon and pruby have both done some realisticbiome stuff.

Excerpts from justin kilpatrick's message of 2015-02-23 23:10:20 +0000:

[Dan Quist]

I'll sign off on whatever you want me to.

[wildweazel]

I consent to whatever but if you're doing public credits please use this address. Not sure why github is identifying me by my account email instead of public profile email.

[justin kilpatrick]

I need to make a list for every plugin and start crossing names off as we get consent, going to be time consuming. 

[Jake Jungbluth]

I consent whatever if I have done anything with any of the plugins that needs licensing 

[Nick]

Make a google docs form that states that we want your forever permission to use and license any code you submit for civcraft development blah blah. Have a yes / no radio box with a text box for their email. Maybe have some checkboxes for what plugins they have already submitted to. Have it save off to a personal spreadsheet.

N

[justin kilpatrick]

... erocs stop being smarter than me

[Rourke750]

Its like its his job.

[Dr. Andrew Jawa]

Would this be considered acceptable consent as far as the law is concerned?

Be sure to require login for answering the form.

Excerpts from Rourke750's message of 2015-02-26 19:50:53 -0500:

[justin kilpatrick]

bumping this, this is pretty much just paper pushing, collecting email address of people who need to be emailed about this should be easy enough for any volunteer, then I can just mass email them and get this handled. 

[mark grandi]

Didn't I give you the emails of everyone who committed code to the github repos? Why not use that?

~mark

---

From: justin kilpatrick
Sent: ‎3/‎9/‎2015 1:31 PM
To: Dr. Andrew Jawa; civcraftdevelopers
Subject: Re: Plugin Licenses

[justin kilpatrick]

did you? I need to sit down and go over this. 

[Mark Grandi]

this just in! ttk does't read email! =P

the link is here:

https://gist.github.com/mgrandi/d01e12af8099fd2dfacd

~mark 

[justin kilpatrick]

I don't remember email big difference.