Support NeoGAF

[LiquidMetal14]

My take (I'm a Linux nerd - in fact, that's how I make a living!):

1. The original author (who then has the copyright to the said GPL code) may have given Sony the right to include the GPL code in their game. If so, then nothing is wrong, and the GPL has not been violated. The copyright owner can do whatever he/she wants with their code, after all.

2. If there is a violation, Sony could:
- negotiate with the copyright owner for distribution rights
- stop distributing the game
- release the necessary bits of the game that are affected

Essentially, this is non-news.

Was hoping someone would say something to that effect.

 

[minus_273]

Wouldn't the more likely scenario be that Sony simply corrects the problem or settles with the authors of the code? I doubt you see Sony releasing the source code.

the problem is that code is GPL infected. There is no single author to settle with.

 

[wsippel]

My take (I'm a Linux nerd - in fact, that's how I make a living!):

1. The original author (who then has the copyright to the said GPL code) may have given Sony the right to include the GPL code in their game. If so, then nothing is wrong, and the GPL has not been violated. The copyright owner can do whatever he/she wants with their code, after all.

Assuming there is only one author. Seems likely, though - libarc is a rather obscure library.

 

[glimmerman]

If you link GPL'd code, the license applies as far as I know. That's the difference between GPL and LGPL. You may distribute closed source applications that link to LGPL'd code, but you may not distribute closed source applications that link to GPL'd code.

In fact its arguable that if you statically link LGPL code, its still a "derivative" whereas if you dynamically link LGPL, its probably OK.

Also it should be noted this kind of thing has happened a few times, notably with wireless access points and the like.
The world will not come to an end because of this, even if Sony did not obtain the permission of the copyright holders to use libarc.

 

[Pope Benedict XVI]

So does this mean that ICO will never be available as a downloadable game in future? Or at least that they'd have to rewrite parts of it before making it available?

 

[Vic]

libogg and libvorbis are BSD, not GPL. It's perfectly fine to use that stuff in closed source applications. Also common are Freetype, libtga, libpng and ODE for example, but those aren't GPL'd, either.

I'm not comparing the restrictions of the type of license the ogg format is using with the one in the OP's news. I just mentioned PC games that are using ogg which helps when you want to listen the soundtrack outside the game.

 

[tanod]

So does this mean that ICO will never be available as a downloadable game in future? Or at least that they'd have to rewrite parts of it before making it available?

My thoughts exactly. :'(

 

[JoeMartin]

What a shameless publicity stunt.
i expect a spike in ICO sales.

Yes, it's a diabolical scheme by Sony to try and boost the sales of a first generation PS2 game no longer in print.

 

[wsippel]

In fact its arguable that if you statically link LGPL code, its still a "derivative" whereas if you dynamically link LGPL, its probably OK.

Also it should be noted this kind of thing has happened a few times, notably with wireless access points and the like.
The world will not come to an end because of this, even if Sony did not obtain the permission of the copyright holders to use libarc.

Yes, stuff like that happened quite a few times in the past. It either meant "cease production and distribution" (D-Link) or "release the source" (Linksys).

 

[glimmerman]

Yes, stuff like that happened quite a few times in the past. It either meant "cease production and distribution" (D-Link) or "release the source" (Linksys).

but in both those cases vast percentage of the total code in the AP was GPL. In this case I doubt its more than a couple of hundred lines out of millions. This is much more likely to result in
a) nothing happening, since sony's vast army of lawyers could in the worst case just stall whatever the original copyright owner tries legally

or b) pay him some small amount for a license.

Its extremely unlikely to result in a cessation of distribution or opening of the source.

Although of course I would love to see the code if it did

 

[hteng]

this reminds me of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R incident where they were using Doom3's code? can't remember what code exactly

 

[wsippel]

but in both those cases vast percentage of the total code in the AP was GPL. In this case I doubt its more than a couple of hundred lines out of millions. This is much more likely to result in
a) nothing happening, since sony's vast army of lawyers could in the worst case just stall whatever the original copyright owner tries legally

or b) pay him some small amount for a license.

Its extremely unlikely to result in a cessation of distribution or opening of the source.

Although of course I would love to see the code if it did

The code is probably quite ugly. It's a game, after all.

Anyway, it depends on several factors: Will Sony get sued? If so, where and by whom? "a" wouldn't work in Germany for example, we already had several rulings about GPL violations, and the violators always lose. The GPL is a proven license here. But I don't know about Japan (libarcs original author and copyright holder is Japanese). "b" might work, if every single author can be identified, since the original author didn't assign the copyright to the FSF. If he had, Sony would be in trouble.

 

[glimmerman]

this reminds me of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R incident where they were using Doom3's code? can't remember what code exactly

I think they were using some art assets or maybe a font or something, not actual code anyway.

 

[loosus]

Are there any licenses that allow total control over the source code, meaning that even credit need not be given?

 

[wsippel]

Are there any licenses that allow total control over the source code, meaning that even credit need not be given?

Yes: Public Domain.

 

[glimmerman]

The code is probably quite ugly. It's a game, after all.

Anyway, it depends on several factors: Will Sony get sued? If so, where and by whom? "a" wouldn't work in Germany for example, we already had several rulings about GPL violations, and the violators always lose. The GPL is a proven license here. But I don't know about Japan (libarcs original author and copyright holder is Japanese). "b" might work, if every single author can be identified, since the original author didn't assign the copyright to the FSF. If he had, Sony would be in trouble.

I like looking at other's ugly code... helps me validate my own self worth when I look at my own ugly hacks...

 

[GameGamer]

This is kinda interesting, makes me wonder how much under-the-shelf GPL usage there is in -all software by hack programmers- these days

I had to fix that for you.

It's a disgusting habit nowadays for programmers.

Steal music, steal code... they don't care.

 

[dogmaan]

this reminds me of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R incident where they were using Doom3's code? can't remember what code exactly

they were using a commercial texture package that ID also uses, the internetz noticed they had a few identical textures, and assumed the dev's where stealing

 

[jman2050]

My take (I'm a Linux nerd - in fact, that's how I make a living!):

1. The original author (who then has the copyright to the said GPL code) may have given Sony the right to include the GPL code in their game. If so, then nothing is wrong, and the GPL has not been violated. The copyright owner can do whatever he/she wants with their code, after all.

As far as I know this isn't entirely true, as the GPL is automatically in effect for ALL uses of the code, regardless of the copyright holder's wishes. IIRC, if the guy didn't mind Sony using his code, then he shouldn't have GPL'd it to begin with.

 

[Dalauz]

I got a chance to look at the European release of ICO, and pretty much immediately noticed the new files SRCFILE.TXT and TRFILE.TXT. SRCFILE is the complete 'objdump -d' output of the game, with the debugging line numbers, and TRFILE is the complete linker log. Which includes these function names:
(.....)

I haven't suceeded in contacting anyone about this; SCEI and ONICOS/Izumo don't read their email. Someone who speaks better Japanese than me should try writing them a letter

i think his japanese is perfect

 

[glimmerman]

As far as I know this isn't entirely true, as the GPL is automatically in effect for ALL uses of the code, regardless of the copyright holder's wishes. IIRC, if the guy didn't mind Sony using his code, then he shouldn't have GPL'd it to begin with.

The copyright owner may license his code any way he chooses.

Of course if multiple copyright owners own the same code, they all have to agree as to how to change the licensing.

 

[herod]

If I read the slashdot comments correctly, it isn't actually GPL code at all.

 

[Metalmurphy]

Didn't something like this happen with Doom on STEAM? Nothing happened there I doubt it'll happen here.

 

[Vennt]

As far as I know this isn't entirely true, as the GPL is automatically in effect for ALL uses of the code, regardless of the copyright holder's wishes. IIRC, if the guy didn't mind Sony using his code, then he shouldn't have GPL'd it to begin with.

Absolute rubbish, sorry.

A person is always free to dual-license their own code, even if one of those licenses is the GPL, it's one of the biggest myths spread about the GPL that has been debunked many many times.

The only case where you could not dual-license in such a way would be if there were multiple authors and the source was based on already code already released under the GPL.

 

[chubigans]

they were using a commercial texture package that ID also uses, the internetz noticed they had a few identical textures, and assumed the dev's where stealing

Not really assumed since many of the textures were named identical to Doom 3 ("hellspawn.bmp", etc.)

 

[usea]

Not really assumed since many of the textures were named identical to Doom 3 ("hellspawn.bmp", etc.)

Assumed is absolutely the correct word. STALKER devs didn't steal ID's textures. Both companies used a commercial texture set. It's really not that complex, why can't you understand it?

 

[Imperial Hot]

The GPL is a "viral license". You can't use GPL-code in a proprietary application, or else the whole application becomes GPL. Which means that, if these aren't baseless accusations, and Sony has to release the complete sourcecode or face the consequences.

Ico for PC confirmed?

 

[charlequin]

As far as I know this isn't entirely true, as the GPL is automatically in effect for ALL uses of the code, regardless of the copyright holder's wishes.

It's not possible for a license to have that effect. As the copyright holder of a work, you retain overall control of it unless you transfer that control or release it into the public domain. You can't revoke a license you've already granted (unless you do so by using a provision already written into the license) but you can freely release the same code under less-restrictive or differently-restrictive licenses, or even use it yourself in ways that are against the license you offer to others.

 

[Bebpo]

Why do people like to fuck up what's good for everyone?

If the word of this gets out to Sony, Ico will never see a downloadable re-release on PS3/PS4. How the fuck is that good for gamers that a classic will be lost forever?

This is like how the dumbass guys showed Kojima that the MGS theme was plagiarized and now MGS4, the final chapter, doesn't have the full main theme.


Sometimes if you find out something that's only going to make things WORSE for everyone around you, you keep your mouth fucking shut.

 

[RumFore]

Why do people like to fuck up what's good for everyone?

If the word of this gets out to Sony, Ico will never see a downloadable re-release on PS3/PS4. How the fuck is that good for gamers that a classic will be lost forever?

This is like how the dumbass guys showed Kojima that the MGS theme was plagiarized and now MGS4, the final chapter, doesn't have the full main theme.


Sometimes if you find out something that's only going to make things WORSE for everyone around you, you keep your mouth fucking shut.

Hmm can you explain that further?

 

[Sharp]

As far as I know this isn't entirely true, as the GPL is automatically in effect for ALL uses of the code, regardless of the copyright holder's wishes. IIRC, if the guy didn't mind Sony using his code, then he shouldn't have GPL'd it to begin with.

I know it's been said, but this is just wrong. Pretty much all of the Mozilla project source code is triple-licensed (GPL/LGPL/MPL), in order to make it easier for companies to use the code but still stay aboard the open-source purist train. If that weren't the case, open source applications would be much less common in corporate environments.

 

[Madman]

Looks like I really have to get on picking up a copy of ICO.

 

[Eiji]

 

[Big-E]

This is like how the dumbass guys showed Kojima that the MGS theme was plagiarized and now MGS4, the final chapter, doesn't have the full main theme.

Has this been finally confirmed now? The game wont be the same.

 

[Zeenbor]

You do know that all PS1, PS2, and PS3 games are compiled using open source compilers, right? (If the devs aren't using CodeWarrior and are using SN's GCC ports...)

 

[Bebpo]

Has this been finally confirmed now? The game wont be the same.

Kojima dodged the question and fanboys will try to take his non-answer has proof it's still there.

When asked if the MGS theme would still be in there he said something like "an opening song? Yeah we have an OP song!"

I figure it's gone since they specifically removed that 20 second part from the MGS3 theme song in the 20th collection.

 

[wsippel]

You do know that all PS1, PS2, and PS3 games are compiled using open source compilers, right? (If the devs aren't using CodeWarrior and are using SN's GCC ports...)

Yes. Add PSP and Wii. Just like most closed source applications for Mac and Linux. So what?

 

[SolidSnakex]

Has this been finally confirmed now? The game wont be the same.

Kojima's said the theme will be in it. The issue is that it's not the entire song that's plagarized, it's just a certain section of it. And that certain section is the part that everyone loves the most.

 

[Wollan]

They removed the good part? Jesus, license it or something.

 

[Big-E]

They removed the good part? Jesus, license it or something.

Honestly I don't see why they wouldn't. It couldn't cost that much to do it since isn't it some like folk Russian peace or something. Fuck that Russian gaming site for ruining everything.

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

Kojima's said the theme will be in it. The issue is that it's not the entire song that's plagarized, it's just a certain section of it. And that certain section is the part that everyone loves the most.

Well the theme has changed a little bit with each iteration of the game, as well as the introduction of Harry Gregson-Williams. The 20th Anniversary theme doesn't sound too butchered. We'll see what happens with MGS4.

 

[TekunoRobby]

This might have been important if it were discovered six years ago.

Now? It's irrelevant.

 

[Dali]

*blinks*

.....

Oh... non news. Nevermind then.

 

[Timo]

you did the remix album, but i give you points for trying!

DFA 1979 REPRESENT AND SALUTE.

anyways, weird ico!