[DGD]Patches
Christopher Allen
ChristopherA at Skotos.net
Wed Apr 12 00:27:07 CEST 2000
Jason Cone wrote:
> I can't speak to the functional differences of the 2 versions (I heard that
> there was extended network functionality in the commercial one, but don't
> quote me), but there's more to the process of obtaining a commercial license
> than meets the eye.
>
> [Note to Chris -- you're a respected innovator and your reputation precedes
> you, but I'm going to be quite frank in my opinion of _my_ understanding of
> the license terms. If I'm wrong on any of the points, do clarify as these
> points were the major reasons why I did not further pursue a commercial
> license.]
>
> It costs money. That's a given and is not all that surprising. If you're a
> college student, though, I wouldn't dwell on the possibility for too long.
> ;) In addition, though, here is my understanding of the rights and
> obligations associated with said license (as per my conversation with
> Chris):
>
> 1) You are able to use DGD proper for commercial purposes; profit can be
> gained from its usage.
>
> 2) You are given a copy of the lib that Skotos is working on and are
> required to use that lib as the foundation for the projects that will run on
> your commercial license of DGD.
>
> 3) If you make any modifications to said lib, you are further required to
> submit those changes to Skotos so that they can be evaluated for inclusion
> in their copy of the same lib. This is where I begged for some
> clarification. It was implied that implementation-specific changes would
> not need to be submitted, but I was not given a clear definition of what
> "implementation-specific" meant. The point was finally justified by him
> suggesting to me that everyone should be working with, and benefiting from,
> the same advances.
The line of demarcation is becoming more specific as we do some architectural
partitioning out of SkotOS -- we have a number of layers above the kernel
library:
-------------------------------------------------------------
/ Game \
\ World /
-------------------------------------------------------------
/ Game \
\ Specific Mechanics /
=============================================================
------------------------------------- ---------------------
/ WorldLib \ / IFLib \
| inventory stance pose | |
| proximity details faces desc | socials verbs |
\ exits gender volition physics / \ adverbs errors /
--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- \ \ -- - - - - - - - --
/ DevLib \ / ToolLib \
| Services Interpreters | |
| | sam | dtd |
| sid | devd || state | forms | sami | xmlgen | xmlparse |
\ logd | helpd || | | / \ /
-------------------------------------------------------------
/ \
| System |
| Library |
| Object Services || Net Services |
| || |
| initd | idd | progdbd |syslogd || nptd | httpd | devuserd@ |
\ | | | || | | /
-------------------------------------------------------------
/ \
| Kernel |
| Library |
| |
| security ownership resources thread-local logon |
\ storage /
-------------------------------------------------------------
/ \
| D G D |
| |
| LPC Compiler | Run-Time | Database | I/O | Parser |
\ | | | | /
-------------------------------------------------------------
It is the game world and game specific mechanics (such as the specifics of
combat) that is the property of the developer using our libraries.
> 4) I inquired to the possibilities of obtaining a license where #2 and #3
> would not exist. This had evidentally not been asked before b/c he replied
> with, "Sure. I'm sure we can work something out." :) "Working something
> out" entails paying upward of $75K. Not good.
>
> #1 is expected. #2 would be acceptable given that #3 didn't exist. I just
> don't see how they can expect others to pay for a license, be required to
> use a code base, submit changes made to said codebase (which, by the way,
> they would be able to further profit from), and then feel that they have
> something special; unique; and worth inidividual development. To me, that's
> like saying, "Here's your house. You paid good money for it. Any
> additions/improvements that you make to the house, though, must also be
> provided to everyone else in your neighborhood." Nuh uh. I'll go rent an
> apartment and loose all potential equity I might gain from owning a house.
> ;)
Essentially correct, to be more precise to the nuances here is the story.
We paid a lot of money for our license to DGD, and since have have several man
years of efforts based on it. We are not really planning to be in the business
of selling drivers or mud libs, and in fact are concerned about it diluting our
business in the future. However, we don't want to make obtaining DGD as hard as
it was for us. Thus we'll make a game license available to others for $75K, or
$25K a year. We are also open to a royalty scheme, but we will require an
advance and minimum quarterly royalties.
We are willing to lower these prices, however, in return we expect to get some
contributions from you which we can incorporate into the product. Thus the
requirement to use our library and submit enhancements back to us.
We also will be making available to select developers, starting in the late
summer, the ability to create games using SkotOS on our service, in which we
will pay royalties to the developers when the product is released to our
customers. See www.skotos.net for more information on what we will be offering.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
. Christopher Allen Skotos Tech Inc. ..
. 1512 Walnut St., Berkeley, CA 94709-1513 ..
. <http://www.Skotos.net> o510/649-4030 f510/649-4034 ..
List config page: http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd
More information about the DGD
mailing list