Eviltyphoon Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Yea, good idea!!!Eviltyphoon - Eldaren"]grabs [IG][SB] Sylexus.Should I give him the special Renzo cell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soljah Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Nobody really 'owns' eclipse, considering it has had many different developers, and it is open source.Marsh pays for the forums, and runs them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mulkaar Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 ROFL. If you don't know who owns Eclipse you got a lot to learn. I beleive Soljah and that are like the Kings but Marsh is a God? Marsh owns it all but yeh because it's open source he cant stop people from modding the engine and claiming it as their own. i think. Also is Eclipse under a creative commons license? So can you earn money off eclipse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Refuge Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 @|:> ROFL. If you don't know who owns Eclipse you got a lot to learn. I beleive Soljah and that are like the Kings but Marsh is a God? Marsh owns it all but yeh because it's open source he cant stop people from modding the engine and claiming it as their own. i think. Also is Eclipse under a creative commons license? So can you earn money off eclipse?Actually, Eclipse isn't Open source, and you need Marsh's permission to distribute the engine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruitpunch Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Marsh is kinda like God and Baron is like JesusThen Simiues and all of them are likem the apostles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENIGMAX Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 @[SB:> [US] Mr. Tape link=topic=38503.msg369757#msg369757 date=1234489334]> This is really random, but who owns Eclipse and the forums? Like who is the main admin? They guy who developed the forums? Well… this question depends on which day it is .. for there are many Marsh Clones.... so thought it might be right that "marsh" is the true leader, many Marsh are around looking over his vast empire called Eclipse :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I am an apostle of Marsh? Well….true, true... But, Eclipse IS open source, cause your able to download it right on the home page. But to distribute it does require permission from Marsh. Just to prevent confusion, open source can have limitations while remaining open :3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Refuge Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Even though the source is downloadable, Eclipse doesn't follow the open source definition though; the source was made available originally so people could modify their Eclipse game engine without the limitations of sadscript Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENIGMAX Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 intresting … open source with a close concept clause :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Eclipse is open source, there are MANY different open source licenses. They all limit the use in some way. I think you are confusing open source software with public domain software. All open source software has limitations. Thats why it is important to read and learn the license of the software you are using. Open source software with no limitations is public domain.Most open source licenses prevent you from removing original authors names or re-selling it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Refuge Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd**Introduction**_Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:**1\. Free Redistribution****The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software** as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.**2\. Source Code**The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost preferably, downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.**3\. Derived Works**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.**4\. Integrity of The Author's Source Code**The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the license allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.**5\. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups**The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.**6\. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor**The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.**7\. Distribution of License**The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.**8\. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product**The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original software distribution.**9\. License Must Not Restrict Other Software**The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.**10\. License Must Be Technology-Neutral**No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface._* * *I know the difference between Open Source and Public Domain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsh Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Yea but if you read the license we set out, you cant edit your game all you want but you cant make a new engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwen Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 people read licences… i just thought it was another page to see how quickly i can hit next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylexus44 Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Crap Ive been jailed for my beliefs. Luckily im an atheist so all of those "beliefs" were lies. So im outta here, cyazz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adulese Games Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 And we have successfully abliterated another simple topic. Our work as a community is done. Now where's da cake.- Adulese+20 De-rail points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Comnena Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 @Gwendalin:> people read licences… i just thought it was another page to see how quickly i can hit next.I take it your next-clicking response time is tuned to the order of milliseconds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Oracle Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 lol. I don't think ANYONE reads the license unless they like plan to hack/crack the program. =D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenton Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 @Soljah:> Nobody really 'owns' eclipse, considering it has had many different developers, and it is open source.> > Marsh pays for the forums, and runs them.Actually Marsh owns it all. He employs the developers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soljah Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 @Lenton:> link=topic=38503.msg371286#msg371286 date=1234627034]> Actually Marsh owns it all. He employs the developers.You can't 'employ' volunteers. If someone wants to develop Eclipse, they can, but they cannot develop it into a new engine (non-eclipse). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anasky Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 @Gwendalin:> I feel that i did wons it! i had an army to prove it.. so there :PLONG LIVE THE GWENDALINS! xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenton Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 @Soljah:> You can't 'employ' volunteers. If someone wants to develop Eclipse, they can, but they cannot develop it into a new engine (non-eclipse).This still doesn't argue your point that nobody realy owns Eclipse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruitpunch Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 @The:> lol. I don't think ANYONE reads the license unless they like plan to hack/crack the program. =Dwhich would be pointless since its freeware Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drummerpete Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 @Fruitpunch:> which would be pointless since its freewareSo true.There isn't much you can do illegaly, except market it or take away the credits. xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soljah Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 @[Nano:> Lenton link=topic=38503.msg380116#msg380116 date=1235244706]> This still doesn't argue your point that nobody realy owns Eclipse.Actually, the fact that a single person on the forums cannot stop the official development of Eclipse, shows it has no owner, or 'boss'.Even if Marsh were to Tell the developers to stop developing, I doubt they will, nor will community members drop what they are doing and not continue to develop it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsh Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 This entire topic is pointless, the guy got his answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now