Think Quake and various other games. The game itself if freely downlaodable under the GPL, but you still need the commercial CD's for the game data.

Quote: Original post by Sander
Think Quake and various other games. The game itself if freely downlaodable under the GPL, but you still need the commercial CD's for the game data.

Well, more precisely, the game engine is licensed under the GPL, but you need the game data to play the game.

For Q3A, the data is proprietary and id still requires payment for a legal license to use it with the engine. Anyone else can take the engine and provide their own data, at no cost or for a fee, without violating the GPL. The GPL license specifically allows such commercial use.

The above example demonstrates that it is nonsensical to talk about cost when talking about licenses. If the database of games is going to talk about cost, then why confuse the issue by using "License" as the heading?

Because you need a commercial (as in proprietry) license for the game data.

Quote: Original post by Sander
Because you need a commercial (as in proprietry) license for the game data.

That's true, but one argument still exists: that "License" isn't referring to the license so much as "Does it cost anything for me to play?"

For the free games, maybe the license is too draconian to be considered free? An example application: Windows Media Player 7+. It's only free as in cost, but even though it doesn't cost anything to get it, the license agreement makes too many requirements, especially with regards to so-called DRM. Would it be listed as free along with freeware, public domain software, and free-as-in-speech applications? If it is about cost, list it as cost, but if it is about the license, even though grandma supposedly won't care, be a bit more detailed with regards to what license is applied.

What I mean is that yes, while Q3A the game is a commercial license, so is the engine code. It's under the GPL. Another game might be under a commercial license, but its engine may be proprietary. A free-as-in-beer game may or may not have a commercial engine, which may be the GPL, and it would be listed as free. It's not very precise to say you're talking about "License", which almost always refers to the source code and freedom when you refer to Linux-based-anything, when you are instead refer to whether or not you are required paying for the game data. Or, at the very least, if you are going to talk about it in that way, say so somewhere.

EDIT: Also, even the lgfaq makes a distinction, although it is still confusing:
"Non-Commercial, Free Software (at least the source code part, not necessarily the pretty data bits)"

Quote:
Q: Where can I find freeware/GPL'd games?

A: In our Linux game list: http://www.icculus.org/lgfaq/gamelist.php?license=free

At least the source code part? So now free specifically refers to Free games, not just freeware, but the question makes it sound like both?

[Edited by - GBGames on August 9, 2006 9:25:03 AM]