Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
1–10 of 16 posts
Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#2The developer open sourcing all of this is awesome.
Here's an blog post from them last year covering their open source plans: https://bitcraftonline.com/news/open-sourcing-bitcraft-onlin...
Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#3[1]: https://bitcraftonline.com/news/bitcraft-open-sourcing-updat...
Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#4Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#5> Operate official, unofficial, private or any otherwise competing BitCraft servers
Doesn't this contradict the Apache license? Isn't this "source-available"?
Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#6> You cannot: > Operate official, unofficial, private or any otherwise competing BitCraft servers Doesn't this contradict the Apache license? Isn't this "source-available"?
Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#7> You cannot: > Operate official, unofficial, private or any otherwise competing BitCraft servers Doesn't this contradict the Apache license? Isn't this "source-available"?
It's much more permissive than source available: you can use the source code for nearly any of your own projects, just not one specific application.
Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#8Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#9> You cannot: > Operate official, unofficial, private or any otherwise competing BitCraft servers Doesn't this contradict the Apache license? Isn't this "source-available"?
I'd imagine that by making a "BitCraft" server, it actually wouldn't violate the source code license terms at all, but they are putting you on notice that it would violate trademark and copyright on non-code things, so it wouldn't be legal irregardless of the code license.
Re: Open source server code for the BitCraft MMORPG
#10> You cannot: > Operate official, unofficial, private or any otherwise competing BitCraft servers Doesn't this contradict the Apache license? Isn't this "source-available"?
I think that they mean that you can't make a "BitCraft" server as it would infringe on their trademark. If you made a "ByteCraft" server with all of your own assets, and didn't mention "BitCraft" at all, even if the code was exactly the same, I'd imagine you would be in the clear. I'd imagine that by making a "BitCraft" server, it actually wouldn't violate the source code license terms at all, but they are putting yo…
Contents of the repo are fair game, anything bitcraft related outside the repo is not, and you have to share attribution under Apache - seems fair. I don't see any bitcraft assets or trademark things in the codebase, but I wonder how much of the game logic and play has to change before it's sufficiently different from the things being protected?