Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

yagiska · 01-22-2003, 06:37 PM

Thanks for the info, both of you.

It wasn't a work for hire no, they expressed interest in obtaining a commercial license to use the software. Even in the eval license, the right to source code was specifically not granted.

As far as essential, no more essential than MudOS's specific code is essential to running a mud. As for proving it, I'm not sure I could. Their source code in question is a direct copy of my source code, including most of my spelling errors in comments. Some has been added to it, but it would be obvious to even a non-technical observer when comparing mine to theirs that they both came from the same source. The problem is, since I didn't file, I imagine I'd have a problem proving theirs was a copy of mine, and not the other way around.

Either way though, I'm not really concerned about suing them. I'd like to, on principle, but while they intend to make their game p2p, it is not yet, so I wouldn't recoup any money even if damages were awarded. And besided, they stole v1.0, and while that's angered me, it's not v2.0. So I'm comparing this (at least to make myself feel a little better) to someone stealing the source code for windows 3.1 right before windows95 was released.

That brings me to my real concern. As I go to file v2.0, and release it, I'm worried about them coming back later and saying "v2.0 is based on our work".

01-22-2003, 06:37 PM	#4
yagiska New Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 6	Thanks for the info, both of you. It wasn't a work for hire no, they expressed interest in obtaining a commercial license to use the software. Even in the eval license, the right to source code was specifically not granted. As far as essential, no more essential than MudOS's specific code is essential to running a mud. As for proving it, I'm not sure I could. Their source code in question is a direct copy of my source code, including most of my spelling errors in comments. Some has been added to it, but it would be obvious to even a non-technical observer when comparing mine to theirs that they both came from the same source. The problem is, since I didn't file, I imagine I'd have a problem proving theirs was a copy of mine, and not the other way around. Either way though, I'm not really concerned about suing them. I'd like to, on principle, but while they intend to make their game p2p, it is not yet, so I wouldn't recoup any money even if damages were awarded. And besided, they stole v1.0, and while that's angered me, it's not v2.0. So I'm comparing this (at least to make myself feel a little better) to someone stealing the source code for windows 3.1 right before windows95 was released. That brings me to my real concern. As I go to file v2.0, and release it, I'm worried about them coming back later and saying "v2.0 is based on our work".