Is SuperTuxKart libre?

[bzt]

OK, I get your point now, but I still have great doubts.

The GitHub permission doesn't seem at all good

I've read it, and this is perfectly good. He only asked for attribution, which is perfectly fine and does not make STK less libre. (Be very careful here: if you overuse libre by not allowing attribution, you might end up serving the corporations' interest so that they can steal open source and claiming copyright for themselves. Attribution requirement is there to avoid that, and it does not make a software less libre.)

Until there is clear evidence of the authors' acceptance of GPL

There is rock solid evidence. In this permission, he wrote, and I quote:

As a free and open-source project, I have no objection to you having a BSD Daemon kart.

Which means he was well aware about STK's licensing terms, and the wording leaves no doubt for the author's acceptance of GPL (not just for STK, but about Free and Open Source culture in general).

Cheers,
bzt

[drummyfish]

I've added a list to the original post at the top. It's not about trademark but copyright and it's not only Beastie but also Hexley + many small files without a license.

@bzt I disagree

If I manage to reach the author I'll post his reply here.

[bzt]

@bzt I disagree

You might disagree, however so far you have failed to provide any proof that Beastie's permission is not okay (you just keep repeating that but never said why it isn't okay), so you calling the permission "legally questionable" is quite a stretch and not an evidence-based fact rooted in any paragraph of the GPL license. It is important to stress that this is just your opinion.

Please add "IMHO" to the first post.

If I manage to reach the author I'll post his reply here.

Ok, fair enough. But please remind him that this will only apply to a specific 3d mesh in STK and not to Beastie in general, and that GPL does not allow mixing with non-free licenses.

Cheers,
bzt

[drummyfish]

I've provided very good evidence and arguments here: https://forum.freegamedev.net/viewtopic ... 99#p103345. You just keep repeating you don't accept it for no rational reason, I get an impression you're purposefully trying to obscure the topic to hide the issues.

His permission should apply to the Beastie as such, not the 3D mesh, as the mesh is a derivative work of the mascot, and he didn't even create the mesh so he can't give permissions to it.

So far he hasn't responded. I'll try to see if he has other contact info.

[bzt]

I've provided very good evidence and arguments here: https://forum.freegamedev.net/viewtopic ... 99#p103345. You just keep repeating you don't accept it for no rational reason, I get an impression you're purposefully trying to obscure the topic to hide the issues.

This is just a pure lie. That post only contains your opinion, and I did provide evidence that contradicts your statements: I've quoted both the GPL section 7 and McKusick's permission (that makes it clear he is aware that STK is GPL licensed, so you saying "GPL isn't even mentioned anywhere" is not true), but here we go again:

As a free and open-source project, I have no objection to you having a BSD Daemon kart.

Furthermore, I've never denied that STK having a Beastie 3D mesh being ok is just my interpretation, on the other hand you deliberately try to masquarade your opinion as if it were a rock solid fact tested on court. No, it is not. It is just an opinion of a non-lawyer.

You're the one who's trying to cripple STK by questioning some of the beloved mascots just because you think (not knowing for sure, just think) that the permission "isn't good".

His permission should apply to the Beastie as such, not the 3D mesh, as the mesh is a derivative work of the mascot, and he didn't even create the mesh so he can't give permissions to it.

In this case ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS are invalid, because STK can use that 3D mesh for sure (plus STK has McKusick's permission to create that 3D mesh, and the mesh's author has the right to license it under GPL). End of discussion.

Have a nice day,
bzt

ps.: Dude, only someone without rational reason accuses the opponent with not being rational. That's liar politican's 1-0-1.

[drummyfish]

His permission should apply to the Beastie as such, not the 3D mesh, as the mesh is a derivative work of the mascot, and he didn't even create the mesh so he can't give permissions to it.

In this case ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS are invalid, because STK can use that 3D mesh for sure (plus STK has McKusick's permission to create that 3D mesh, and the mesh's author has the right to license it under GPL).

Just going to address this: a free work (e.g. a 3D mesh) mus not be a derivative work of a non-free work (e.g. a proprietary mascot). For example you cannot create a Harry Potter sequel book and publish it under a free license. The same applies to the Beastie 3D mesh, the original mascot has to be free in order for the mesh to be free. What's in question is the original McKusick macot, not any 3D mesh. Also no one needs McKusick's permission to create any 3D model, anyone can create anything they want, even non-free works, however besides this being wrong it's also completely not on topic. Also you never even mentioned Hexley, there is not even any permission for that mascot AFAIK.

I'm not going to further explain to you the basics of free culture, that's only clogging the thread. I know the game may be libre enough for you, that's okay, go and enjoy it, but it's probably not libre enough for people who truly care about the correct definition of free as in freedom, so let me and others work on clearing this out please.

I'll be waiting for valid, on-topic replies.

[bzt]

For example you cannot create a Harry Potter sequel book and publish it under a free license.

Yes, you can, with the written permission of the copyright holder anything is possible.

The same applies to the Beastie 3D mesh, the original mascot has to be free in order for the mesh to be free.

Absolutely not, and this is even discussed in the GPL FAQ. But it is wrong to talk about "free" in this case when STK assets has to be GPL-compatible and not just free. (Everything that's GPL is free, but not everything that's free is GPL)

What's in question is the original McKusick macot, not any 3D mesh.

That's where you're wrong. STK does not ship nor use the original mascot created by McKusick, it is using a 3D mesh created by one of the STK's contributors with permission. If STK were using the original 2D mascot image or if there were no permission to create the 3D model, then, and only then you were right.

Also you never even mentioned Hexley, there is not even any permission for that mascot AFAIK.

Yes, because in lack of written permission to create a 3D mesh of Hexley your concern is perfectly valid with the Hexley model. Again, I have to stress I support your crusade to make STK libre, I just don't agree with announcing the Beastie model non-free when the 3D mesh itself is CC0 licensed, and there's a written permission from McKusick for that model.

Cheers,
bzt

[tempAnon093]

For example you cannot create a Harry Potter sequel book and publish it under a free license.

Yes, you can, with the written permission of the copyright holder anything is possible.

We don't have permission from the Beastie author to publish it under a free license, nor do I see it as likely to ever happen.

Quote from the github issue: (I added an s to the http)

But I would like to get
an agreement with your project which consists of you acknowledging
that you use the BSD Daemon by adding to the BSD Daemon description
on the "Discover" page a statement:

<a href="https://www.mckusick.com/copyright.html>
BSD Daemon used with permission.</a>

Quote from Wikipedia:

In a request to use a license such as Creative Commons, McKusick replied:

I prefer that the BSD Daemon be used in the context of BSD software. That is the reason that I carefully control my copyright of the BSD Daemon image to ensure that the image is not used inappropriately. I have agreed to allow the small image to appear on Wikipedia but not the larger ones. It is also why I am not going to put a Creative Commons copyright on it.

This is an exception for use in SuperTuxKart alone, not to allow us to change the license.
The license explicitly disqualifies certain types of derivative works, such as some commercial uses or anything deemed in bad taste. A fork of SuperTuxKart could violate these rules just by adding the Daemon blowtorching the Windows logo.
Therefore, depicting the BSD Daemon is not "free".

Again, I suspect that this just makes STK, as is, technically not free according to common definitions by FSF and Debian Free Software Guidelines.
Debating definitions won't change that, it's unambiguous.
SuperTuxKart is, at best, free and open source code with a few bundled non-free assets. We're technically open-source software.

I see three options moving forward, ordered in my preference:
- Redesign the violating characters into non-derivative allusions (e.g. an original demon called Beasty, with a different face and body and weapon, in the same kart) and moving them to featured add-ons
- Remove the violating characters, moving them to featured add-ons
- Accept that we aren't FOSS and keep them in core

[drummyfish]

Yes and I have finally received reply from McKusick, which now undeniably confirms he didn't intend to relicense to GPL and says that STK should remove the mascot if it's in conflict:

{l Code}: {l Select All Code}

Thanks for your email laying out these issues. It was my intent that I
was licensing the BSD Daemon as a one-time specific permission to
Super Tux Kart to use in their game. I did not intend for them to
release it under a GPL license. I was not told that they would release
it under GPL nor would I have agreed to that. Assuming that you are
correct that they require that all of their game be under a GPL copyright,
then they should remove the BSD Daemon from their distribution.

   Kirk McKusick

------

 Dear mr. McKusick,
 
 I have recently been researching some free/libre projects and found
 some confusing info about the terms of use of the BSD Daemon mascot
 (of which you are the copyright holder) in Super Tux Kart (a libre
 game). I've been discussing it with other people at
 https://forum.freegamedev.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=18099 and would
 just like to ask you about it to clear any doubts.
 
 1. Your page at http://www.mckusick.com/copyright.html states the
    terms of use of the mascot and these terms are not free as in
    freedom (as they e.g. only allow the use withing "good taste"
    and only to individuals, not groups).
 
 2. This mascot is used in Super Tux Kart, a game that is as a whole
    licensed under GPL, a license that allows anyone to "do anything"
    with any part of it, i.e.  including your mascot. Thanks to GPL,
    anyone can e.g. take your mascot out of the game and start using
    it in "bad taste" and other ways violating your original terms.
 
 3. Now you supposedly game permission for your mascot to be used in
    Super Tux Kart at https://github.com/supertuxkart/stk-code/issues/3062.
    Here is where it gets interesting because it's not clear what
    this permission really means (and I think there might have been
    a misunderstanding between you and the project maintainers).
    Consider this:
 
   - If this was meant to be your contribution of the mascot to the
     GPL licensed project, you technically allowed the usage of your
     mascot under GPL here, rendering your original terms non-effective.
     I.e. by giving this permission you would have allowed ANY use
     of your work to ANYONE (under GPL terms). I am not sure this
     is what you intended to do as your original terms on your page
     still stand (you would probably have changed them to GPL after
     taking this step).
 
   - If this was meant to be only a one-time permission to Super Tux
     Kart specifically (i.e. only to this one project), then the
     project shouldn't be distributing your work under the GPL (and
     shouldn't call itself wholly free or open source as it contains
     non-free parts). Super Tux Kart explicitly states that it will only
     accept works under free licenses (https://supertuxkart.net/Licensing)
     and if your mascot is still generally only available under your
     original terms, it shouldn't have been accepted.
 
 Could you please just answer the following:
 
 In the GitHub issue, was your intention to contribute your mascot
 to Super Tux Kart so that your mascot from that point on becomes
 available to everyone under the terms of GPL (rendering your original
 terms ineffective), or did you intend to just give a one-time
 specific permission to Super Tux Kart to use your mascot while still
 keeping the original terms for everyone else?
 
 Thank you very much for reading all this. I just really care about
 software and cultural freedom and would like to have this cleared.
 Of course, it is absolutely okay for you to apply any terms to your
 work, I'd just like to prevent any confusion about how your work
 is licensed.
 
 Have a great day.
 
 drummyfish

[benau]

First of all, you need to understand that only stk-code is GPL (and we are in a progress to dual-licensing it to MPL by the way), our assets license has mixed of them, even debian has a supertuxkart-data for that purpose (probably)

We have absolute no interest or intention to use GPL for all of our assets

It's not you who decide whether stk should keep using freegamedev.net but our benevolent admin (if this annoys you)

After reading your website i think you should stay away from our stk community away for the sake of our children, you know what I mean

And we never advertise stk as a libre game but a free and open-source one, see our homepage, you and i have different opinon on free

[bzt]

We don't have permission from the Beastie author to publish it under a free license

Yes, but STK does not do that. It does not publish the original Beastie logo under a free license. As a matter of fact, it does not publish the Beastie logo at all.

STK has a permission from the Beastie author to create a derivative 3D model that it actually ships, and McKusick had no objections for creating that derivative work of Beastie as long as STK fulfills two conditions: STK has to be a free and open source (check) and a link should be provided to the original Beastie (check).

@benau: you probably should write to McKusick that drummyfish did not spoke for STK, and that STK is not planning to relicense the original Beastie at all, that was just drummyfish's delusion. It would be bad if McKusick gets angry with STK just because someone lied to him.

Cheers,
bzt

[drummyfish]

We have absolute no interest or intention to use GPL for all of our assets

I thought so and think it's the case, but your licensing page (https://supertuxkart.net/Licensing) has a table of licenses that can be used for the game's assets because these "may be integrated into GPLv3 works" (quoted from the site), so you at least require the assets to be compatible with GPL, and that Beastie definitely isn't as it doesn't even have a free license at all.

It's not you who decide whether stk should keep using freegamedev.net but our benevolent admin (if this annoys you)

Definitely, I don't want to decide anything, I am interested in discourse and importantly I don't want STK removed from these forums (even though I might reasonably request that if it isn't actually libre -- I see these forums as allowing discussion and hosting of all kinds of projects, and I would vote for relaxing the forum rules so that STK could stay if that was needed -- as I say, I still value STK). I only ask, and would like to come to agreement, that STK should be removed from the repositories that require completely free games (such as LGW and Debian main), it can indeed stay in Arch repositories etc.

Let me now voice a sympathy to you, the game's loyal players and developers, I can see this makes you emotional and you may see this as an attack on the game, understandably -- let me assure you I also like STK, I play it, I just want it categorized correctly and not falsely advertised (by this I mean included somewhere where it doesn't belong). There's nothing too bad about not being perfect, but it should be acknowledged, there should be a sentence somewhere that says "this is 99% free except for XYZ, we think it's not a big deal", so as to respect the game's users, to not mislead them, to give them correct information. By no means I want to remove the game's forums from this server or otherwise hurt it (if I demanded all discussion and projects on these forums are perfectly pure, the forum would just be empty, as from my recent research I've found basically all bigger projects suffer from similar issues).

But when we're at it, @Julius what do you think about this whole matter? Would you agree STK is not technically free as a whole? What do you think would be the solutions/takeaways?

[benau]

well that webpage is mainly for addons because in the past we used tuxfamily, now we host our own vps so licensing is not that much important, so even cc by nc is ok for addons

As long as current core assets make linux distro / freegamedev happy i think we can stay this way

[tempAnon093]

STK has a permission from the Beastie author to create a derivative 3D model that it actually ships, and McKusick had no objections for creating that derivative work of Beastie as long as STK fulfills two conditions: STK has to be a free and open source (check) and a link should be provided to the original Beastie (check).

My point is that the license applies to the character, not any logo. We are intentionally depicting the character.

[tempAnon093]

After reading your website

Please keep personal attacks off this forum.

[bzt]

We are intentionally depicting the character.

...with written permission from the copyright holder to do so. What's the problem here? I see none.

After reading your website i think you should stay away from our stk community away for the sake of our children, you know what I mean

I have to agree this is a bit harsh. Drummyfish is not a bad guy, he is just misguided a bit and lost in the woods. Even though his actions are causing quite a lot trouble, I have no reason to doubt his intentions were basically good.

BTW @benau, I really meant it when I said you should write to McKusick and explain to him that drummyfish did not spoke on behalf of the STK development team, and that STK does not want to relicense Beastie at all. Right now he thinks that you want to, which is not good. I would do this myself, but it has to come from an official STK developer.

Cheers,
bzt

[benau]

Assuming that you are
correct that they require that all of their game be under a GPL copyright,
then they should remove the BSD Daemon from their distribution.

I guess he already knows that drummy is just some random people, if you want to send him an email yourself you can go ahead......

STK fans (and devs) time is precious

[drummyfish]

with written permission from the copyright holder to do so. What's the problem here? I see none.

@bzt let me try to explain this again, in a friendly way, I don't hate you

1. In order for a work to be free (as in freedom), it has to grant all 4 basic freedoms (use in any way, study source code, modify and distribute) to everyone without discrimination (see basically any definition of free software or even open source, I don't think there is any doubt about this point).
2. If a work A (a 3D models of a character) is a derivative work of some other work B (the character), then it has the original work (the character) embedded within it, and you (the author of the derivative work) do not have complete rights over the work A you created, you only have rights to the new things you created (e.g. a graphics shader code you've written), the rest (the character's appearance) is owned by the author of the original work B (McKusick). So you do not have complete control over your work. This makes sense because otherwise you could just bypass any copyright by taking a proprietary character, e.g. Harry Potter, 3D model it and then start making new Harry Potter movies with your 3D model without paying money to J. K. Rowling or respecting any of her conditions.
3. Because of the above, you by default can't do things with your derivative work A (3D model of the character) such as publish it and sell it for money, because by that you're making money partly off of the original author's work B (the character) that's "embedded" without your work A (3D model of a character) which violates the original author's (McKusick) rights.
4. Because of the above, you cannot license your work A (3D model of a character) with a free license, because you cannot grant the 4 basic rights (e.g. to use work commercially, to distribute modified versions etc.), you don't even have these right yourself -- at best you can free license the extra things you added that are purely your work (e.g. your shaders).
5. Now the authour of the original work B (McKusick) can give you a permission to do certain things with your work A, e.g. use it in a specific video game and distribute that video game with that character as long as the character isn't depicted in a bad light, while keeping the rest of the rights, e.g. to depict the character in a bad light.
6. However, if you work A (3D model of the character) wants to be free as in freedom, it has to be that it grants all 4 basic freedoms to everyone as per point 1., not just some of the freedoms (e.g. to use and redistribute) to someone (your game specifically).
7. So, as McKusick clearly stated in his email above, he didn't intend to grant all 4 basic freedoms to everyone, he just wanted to grant some right to STK specifically, and not make his work free. Therefore, no derivative work of his work, e.g. a 3D model of his character, can be free licensed (see point 4.). Therefore, the 3D model of the beastie as well as other depictions of his character (icons etc.), are not free as in freedom, and therefore, STK is not free as in freedom as a whole. It contains proprietary parts even if they comply with law (are used with permission). Mere compliance with law doesn't imply freedom in free SW/culture sense -- even proprietary software is legally perfectly fine.
8. As STK containts proprietary parts, I argue it is not libre, and if it is not libre, I argue it shouldn't be in databases and lists of games that are libre.

love and peace

[bzt]

I guess he already knows that drummy is just some random people, if you want to send him an email yourself you can go ahead......

Now why on earth would I do that? That would be just another email from just another random people. As I've said, and I quote: "I would do this myself, but it has to come from an official STK developer".
I gave my warning to you as an experienced project manager, because this is exactly that kind of misunderstanding that could later backfire (and according to Murphy's law it will, at a time when you least expecting it). But if you choose not to care about it, then so be it, that's your choice.

@drummyfish: I understand your views, but please try to understand that not everybody interprets free software that way. The STK developers made it pretty clear that they are fine with the code being free and open source, and there's no intention to make all of the assets fully libre too. This means you still have all the 4 freedoms with STK, but you might have to exclude some models from your forked game, which is perfectly fine and doesn't make the STK game as a whole less free or open source, and this does not take your right to fork STK away.

Cheers,
bzt

[benau]

Ok will make an email then, thanks for your info

[drummyfish]

which is perfectly fine and doesn't make the STK game as a whole less free or open source, and this does not take your right to fork STK away.

I am sorry but you still just keep spreading misinformation here, I can't even legally make a forked project of STK that's managed by non-individuals as McKusick only gave permission to use his mascot to STK, not any aother project managed by non-individuals. Furthermore STK does take away my freedom e.g. to make a fork of STK where I portray Beastie as a pornstar, a freedom that needs to be enabled by definition, not by interpretation as you say. There is nothing subjective. These are not my opinions, these are completely objective facts by definition of free culture, put in place by the repositories STK is to be included in, besides being well established and used for decades by many other organizations. STK objectively violates Debian Free Software Guidelines, which state:

{l Code}: {l Select All Code}

Debian will remain 100% free
...
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
...
No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups


and the fact that Debian requires the whole game to be free, which you yourself admit it isn't. It is not 100% free, the permission forbids specific derivative works and discriminate other non-STK projects. Here you have it clear as days, I don't know how else to tell you, sorry. It should not be in Debian's repos. And in LGW.

Again, I am not going to engage further in this unnecessary spam that's offtopic here, I am pretty exhausted, everyone else here seems to understand this but you (to be honest I think you understand but just keep denying). If you want to further discuss about subjective and personal definitions of free software, by all means go on, but please make a new thread.

cheers

[benau]

Thanks for your email. Given that you have made my copyright clear,
I found his argument that you had GPL'ed beastie a bit far-fetched.
Still, I appreciate you confirmation that you are using beastie under
the terms to which we agreed.

Marshall Kirk McKusick

He replied and I guess it's better to end the discussion now so as to not waste anybody (precious!) time more

[drummyfish]

Yes, thanks you for another confirmation that Beastie is not GPL and STK is not libre, I can end it at that provided appropriate steps will follow, such as removal of STK from LGW.

I would also suggest you update your licensing page at https://supertuxkart.net/Licensing as to allow proprietary assets, in accordance to the fact that STK assets don't have to be libre.

[Wuzzy]

Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, Beastie and Hexley are removed from STK. Would STK then be free software / libre?

What if Beastie is replaced with a similar character that isn't Beasie, but something else? But I'm afraid it couldn't be called "Beastie" anymore or else it would be too obvious. :-/

The sad thing is, having Beastie in STK is kind of the point of STK: A racer with FOSS mascots in it. It is super ironic that STK cannot be itself FOSS because for that very reason.
Dropping Beastie from STK will be VERY sad, but yeah, it's unavailable if you want to honestly call STK to be libre …

The "good taste" clause is infuriating. This is further evidence to me that copyright is basically just a system of oppression to restrict the freedom of expression. The point of freedom is that people might do things you do not approve of. Everything else is not freedom, but authotarianism. :P

Anyway, it seems there is currently no way around that, unfortunately … Instead of pretending the problem doesn't exist, how about thinking about possible solutions?

Maybe a solution is to invent an "unofficial BSD mascot". Not just for STK, but in general ... A pariah, banished from even the Underworld for rebelling against the powers that be ... Just something funny and cute, idk, I'm not an artist. It can't be something boring and generic, it should be nice in its own right, or else it is doomed to fail, obviously. Anyway, and that unofficial mascot could be used safely for anyone without bothering about this annoying permission garbage. The hardest task will be to convince the community to adopt it. I'm not even a BSD person myself, so ...

As for Hexley … Hmm, I don't really care. It's the Darwin mascot, i.e. for the Kernel of Apple's OS. I couldn't care less if Hexley leaves STK, lol. I also don't like the character that much either.

Finally, is there a full list of other problematic resources in STK? Or have you already spotted everything?

PS: I sometimes feel like it is easier to abolish the copyright system than to convince certain copyright holders to budge an inch. Let's not forget, my friends, the only reason why we have this discussion is because copyright suuuuuuuuucks. :P

[tempAnon093]

Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, Beastie and Hexley are removed from STK. Would STK then be free software / libre? [snip] Finally, is there a full list of other problematic resources in STK? Or have you already spotted everything?

Here's a list that should have most of the things we're unsure of (66 issues): https://annuel2.framapad.org/p/supertux ... nties-9o5c
Most of them are trivial assets (a literal cube) or made by former STK staff who just didn't declare an explicit license, so don't let the number scare you!

What if Beastie is replaced with a similar character that isn't Beasie, but something else? But I'm afraid it couldn't be called "Beastie" anymore or else it would be too obvious. :-/

See my comment above for my thoughts on that, we probably could.

Anyway, it seems there is currently no way around that, unfortunately … Instead of pretending the problem doesn't exist, how about thinking about possible solutions?

I keep saying that! Currently Benau asserts that only the code is FOSS and

we never advertise stk as a libre game but a free and open-source one, see our homepage, you and i have different opinon on free

which I think is an unacceptable response as every note-worthy definition of FOSS implies libre. Technically, yes, the homepage says we are simply open-source, and that's fine, but if that's the stance the project takes, we should also take the effort to correct other major sources like lists of FOSS software and our Wikipedia page to indicate only stk-code is FOSS, and discuss with the Debian package manager how to resolve their misplacement of STK.

If the STK staff consider it 'not our problem', I'll do it myself.