Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 165 posts

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#91

Post by LocalH »

vageli wrote: post #86
tzs wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because ip cameras are shipped with binary Linux kernel images they should also provide either the exact source used or an offer of how to get the source. These kind of devices can lead to an interesting situation. Let's say you make Linux-based IP cameras. You accompany every single one you ship with a CD-ROM containing the complete source code. This completely satisfies your GPL obligation with regard to that uni…

> > Because ip cameras are shipped with binary Linux kernel images they should also provide either the exact source used or an offer of how to get the source. > These kind of devices can lead to an interesting situation. > Let's say you make Linux-based IP cameras. You accompany every single one you ship with a CD-ROM containing the complete source code. This completely satisfies your GPL obligation with regard to th…

To anybody who possesses a copy. If you distribute the source with the binary, you have absolutely fulfilled your part of the GPL. Strictly speaking, if one does not have a copy of the binary, they're not entitled to the source.

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#92

Post by amscanne »

tzs wrote: post #79
dmm wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I believe your last statement is incorrect. If you distribute binary GPL'd software such as the Linux kernel you also have to provide the exact source used to generate those binaries. Because ip cameras are shipped with binary Linux kernel images they should also provide either the exact source used or an offer of how to get the source. > For example, programs compiled by gcc (GPL) are not considered derived works…

> Because ip cameras are shipped with binary Linux kernel images they should also provide either the exact source used or an offer of how to get the source. These kind of devices can lead to an interesting situation. Let's say you make Linux-based IP cameras. You accompany every single one you ship with a CD-ROM containing the complete source code. This completely satisfies your GPL obligation with regard to that uni…

This is interesting.

I think the correct interpretation is that you are not “distributing” the software at that point. Distributing implies making a copy of the software itself, whereas here you’re strictly transferring your ownership interest in the device and existing binary blobs.

I don’t believe this class of transfer is actually subject to copyright terms.

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#93

Post by dijit »

gambiting wrote: post #88
haecceity wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it common to leave debug code in production software?

I work on AAA games and we definitely don't leave any debug code in production copies of the games. It's all #ifdef'd out in Retail builds.

I’m always surprised when I see you here but I’m not sure why.

Anyway. I can corroborate this. Debug code is /really/ harming performance in AAA games. Also, you want to remove your “cheats” that QC use to skip chunks of the game.

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#95

Post by monocasa »

patmcc wrote: post #89
monocasa wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author notes that they were able to find constants that the code uses in the binary, so odds are it was at least partially distributed.

The constants mentioned are the following: "01234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz" and "01234567890ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ" It's very possible that separate implementations of this function would use those same constants. It's not as if they're some completely arbitrary strings.

When these constants don't appear elsewhere in the source?

And what, they'd have another implementation of this function, but have a different one with their code because... reasons?

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#96

Post by spraak »

colemickens wrote: post #73

Love clicking on twitter links and being completely confused. They've just stopped showing threads and replies on the non-JS page anymore. This is what we see, and this does appear to be a recent change: https://imgur.com/94u95no there's nothing below this, this is the full page.

But imgur works without JS?

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#98

Post by zaarn »

dijit wrote: post #93
gambiting wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work on AAA games and we definitely don't leave any debug code in production copies of the games. It's all #ifdef'd out in Retail builds.

I’m always surprised when I see you here but I’m not sure why. Anyway. I can corroborate this. Debug code is /really/ harming performance in AAA games. Also, you want to remove your “cheats” that QC use to skip chunks of the game.

Older games are known for still containing various cheats to skip chunks of the game or make them easier. I'd guess a PS1 game might still have debug left in along with cheats simply either due to time pressure or someone forgot.

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#99

Post by Endy »

haecceity wrote: post #72
estebank wrote: post #60

I'm surprised that no comment has extrapolated that since this was a vsprintf implementation copy, the final binary would be non compliant only if the machine code generated for it was distributed, but if it was only used for debugging internal builds (as I would assume), then the original developers didn't run afoul of the license. Am I incorrect in my understanding?

Isn't it common to leave debug code in production software?

If one checks on TCRF, it's a lot more common than developers would like us to believe.

Re: The PS1 Game Spongebob Squarepants: Supersponge Violates the GPL

#100

Post by tylersmith »

vageli wrote: post #84
ralph84 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how asset sales work. The new copyright owner wouldn't be liable for the previous copyright owner's actions. And if the new copyright owner isn't distributing binaries that include the GPL code they haven't violated the GPL.

> That's not how asset sales work. The new copyright owner wouldn't be liable for the previous copyright owner's actions. And if the new copyright owner isn't distributing binaries that include the GPL code they haven't violated the GPL. Interesting, so even if the new copyright holder profited off of the asset, they wouldn't have to comply with the GPL? This is an interesting parallel to real estate, where the last…

The violation is in the distribution. If the current copyright holder distributed copies then he violated the license but more than likely they simply own the copyright to the code and other IP but haven't distributed anything.
Post reply on HN