[Kde-games-devel] Updating AMOR

[Andreas Beckermann]

On Monday 22 May 2006 21:49, Sean O'Brien wrote:
> I asked the author to release it under the GPL in an e-mail (still waiting
> for a reply), but I think we could use the code anyway.  See the license
> below.

No.
There are only 2 ways we could use it:
1. The author explicitly gives us the right to relicense (and assuming that 
the author actually has the right to do so! If he just copied the 
code/graphics from somewhere else, he does not!)
2. The license that the code/graphics is under, are compatible with the GPL.

Whenever you use the word "assume", you clearly can NOT do what you think you 
can. When it comes to legal things, you can NEVER assume ANYTHING. It's 
either granted explicitly, or not allowed.

> The author seems a bit confused about the GPL (which he calls the "GNU
> public license"), and his major concern seems to be "free as in beer".  Of
> the source code he says, "You are free to use the source files in any way
> you wish, as long as credit is given.", provided the software remains
> monetarily free.

Which implies that this is NOT free software (nor open source) at all and in 
particular not GPL compatible. The GPL requires that you are allowed to 
charge money.

[...]
> Note: Because Neko was originally written by
> Masayuki Koba, and ported from his X-Windows
> source code by David Harvey, different portions
> of the Neko source code carry different licenses.

At this point you first have to find out which licenses exactly these are. 
They ALL must be GPL compatible.
And note: this also means that you need permission from BOTH authors for 
relicensing (even if one says he's fine: he has no right to say that, if the 
other author is not fine with it. Unless it's about code that the other 
person did not influence)

> IF YOU WANT TO CHARGE FOR YOUR SOFTWARE
> ---------------------------------------
> If you use any of the following files in your software,
> you MAY NOT charge for it as it is covered by the GNU
> public license:

This is wrong. The GPL allows to charge for the software (legally: not for the 
software, but for the copying)

> If you use any of the following files in your software,
> you MAY charge for it, but must send 20% of the profit or
> from that software, or $1000 to the author (address at the bottom).

This means: you cannot use it under GPL.

> All other files can be used freely as long as credit is given.

Define "freely". This can mean:
1. without restrictions (this would be good)
2. without fee

As long as you don't know which of them is the case: you can't assume that the 
first was intended.

CU
Andi