[MUD-Dev] Re: My vision for DevMUD

ApplePiMan at aol.com ApplePiMan at aol.com
Tue Nov 3 21:35:32 CET 1998

At 11/3/98 5:37 PM Caliban Tiresias Darklock (caliban at darklock.com) 
altered the fabric of reality by uttering:

>I've used a license on my own code releases in the past which basically says
>"If you use this code, you are required to release some of your own code to
>the programming community." I clarify in the license that it doesn't matter
>how much of your code you release or what that code does or what language or
>platform it's relevant to; GPL'd, PD, however you want to release it, just
>release some code that other people can use. Other than that, you can do
>whatever you want with my code provided you don't try to pretend you wrote
>it or conceal the fact that I did.
>So to the list membership in general, does that sound like the sort of
>middle ground people are looking for? And specifically to ApplePiMan, how
>would that sort of thing sit with you?

I hate to say this, but I *still* wouldn't use it. See my previous post 
about why any license at all (short of, and to a degree including, paying 
a licensing fee) is as much of a problem as the specific terms of the 

Beyond that, I might not *have* any code (at least as a commercial 
entity) I was willing to release to the public. For that matter, even as 
an individual I might not (though, as an individual, I suppose I could 
satisfy the terms of your license by releasing the modified code for the 
MUD, which an individual might or might not be willing to do).

I'm afraid if you want serious consideration from commercial users you'll 
either have to go PD or a paid license. Anything else will be too scary 
for corporate decision makers to risk their own and their employees' 
livelihoods on.


Rick Buck, President and CEO  <mailto:rlb at big-i.com>
Beyond Infinity Games, Inc.
See you in The Metaverse! <http://www.big-i.com>

More information about the mud-dev-archive mailing list