Slashdot Mirror
DMCA Claim Over GPL Non-Compliance Shuts Off Minecraft Plug-Ins
New submitter Maxo-Texas writes One of the primary programmers, Wesley Wolfe (Wolvereness), who contributed over 23,000 lines of code to the Bukkit project (which enhances Minecraft server performance and allows others to write mods and plugins) submitted a DMCA request September 5th, preventing use of his code in the popular Bukkit or Spigot (and numerous other Minecraft plugins, mods, and other open source enhancements that depend on them). This has the effect of freezing all further development for multi-player server Minecraft based on these add-ons until the issue is resolved.
The programmer says that Mojang must release the Minecraft server code to the public domain since decompiled, deobfuscated versions of the Java code are included in the Bukkit project before he will withdraw the DMCA. Mojang has never released the real source code and has stated they will not open source the server code to meet the GPL and LGPL licensing requirements. This approach might be a risk for other GPL and LGPL projects out there which are derivative of or enhance non GPL programs or products. Mojang COO Vu Bui writes in a post at the Bukkit forums The official Minecraft Server software that we have made available is not included in CraftBukkit. Therefore there is no obligation for us to provide the original code or any source code to the Minecraft Server, nor any obligation to authorize its use. Our refusal to make available or authorize the use of the original / source code of the Minecraft Server software cannot therefore be considered to give rise to an infringement of any copyright of Wesley, nor any other person. Wesley’s allegations are therefore wholly unfounded.
The programmer says that Mojang must release the Minecraft server code to the public domain since decompiled, deobfuscated versions of the Java code are included in the Bukkit project before he will withdraw the DMCA. Mojang has never released the real source code and has stated they will not open source the server code to meet the GPL and LGPL licensing requirements. This approach might be a risk for other GPL and LGPL projects out there which are derivative of or enhance non GPL programs or products. Mojang COO Vu Bui writes in a post at the Bukkit forums The official Minecraft Server software that we have made available is not included in CraftBukkit. Therefore there is no obligation for us to provide the original code or any source code to the Minecraft Server, nor any obligation to authorize its use. Our refusal to make available or authorize the use of the original / source code of the Minecraft Server software cannot therefore be considered to give rise to an infringement of any copyright of Wesley, nor any other person. Wesley’s allegations are therefore wholly unfounded.
Okay, I read the articles, and I cannot keep the parties straight. Who did what and who is claiming what? Can this be expressed as a simple bulleted list. Too much lawyer. Many nomenclature.
If the "Bukkit" project contains decompiler/disassembled portions of the Minecraft server software (which is not ODD licensed)...wouldn't that mean the guy who include said disassembled code in his project is the one doing the infringing? And if that's the case, why would Mojang EVER feel obligated to release their serve source code because a guy who literally stole it anyway is demanding they do so?
Always nice to see the same people who likely opposed the DMCA are now exploiting it for their own purposes anyway. Ducking hypocrites.
Since I don't play Mindcraft or pay attention to any of the politics of the game, I'm a little foggy on what exactly the issue is. If I understand things correctly Wesley Wolfe issued a DMCA takedown notice because he contributed code to one or more projects that relied on the closed source game Mindcraft. And now he or others are trying to use this to force Mindcraft to be opened?
If that is the case, boo hoo hoo perhaps you should check the licensing before contributing code next time.
Same basic principle but not as much money involved, fully open source, works on hardware as old as a pentium 3/radeon 9800 (depending on mods and whether you're running the client or client+server).
I do agree that Minecraft and Mojang have an unbelievable level of cult following for no apparent reason though.
I also think it likely this will just result in a demand for all copyrights from contributors to be assigned to the original mod/Mojang, rather than resulting in compliance to the license. Go read gpl-violations.org. GPL enforcement seems to be reaching an all time low, which GPL'd sottware usage is reaching an all time high.
A derivative can't affect the licensing of that from which it is derived or adds to. It does work in the opposite direction - an original can force derivatives to follow the same license as the original, but that is a one-way thing. He has no leg to stand on here.
As I understand the story:
So Wolvereness contributed to violation of Mojang's copyright and now wants his contribution to this violation removed from the internet?
Or am I reading this incorrectly? The DMCA notice is for CraftBukkit, but he links to the license of Bukkit which are different projects (I think).
"Either release the server code that I stole from you for my own project, or...else?"
Does this spoiled brat actually think that going to play out in his favour? The only reason the Bukkit project existed was the disassembled code from the Minecraft server. A violation Mojang chose to ignore, when they could just have easily turned at and sued his entitled ass into the ground.
It's as if the furry freak actually thinks he DESERVES to have for free what he stole in the first place. If he hasn't already exhausted every bit of goodwill Mojang had for him then this should do the fucking trick. Time that somebody put one of tbese bratty thieving "OSS" developers into financial ruin or jail.
My understanding of the issue makes things look better for Wolfe.
He contributed code to the project - licensed as LGPL - before the Bukkit team was aquired by Mojang. At that time the server code - decompiled and deobfuscated - included in the releases was not falling under the LGPL license because it was not owned by the releasing team.
Forward to when the Bukkit team is aquired by Mojang - who owns the copyrights to the server code - and a new release is made. At this point the server code included in the release, which is copyrighted by Mojang, falls under the LGPL.
I am not saying that this is what's the legal reality of the case, but I think this is what Wolfe thinks and why he issued th DMCA takedown notice.
It is me, none else but me. And who would you be?
I don't know what almost any of that is, but if this only negatively affects Minecraft, this situation is a good thing.
I'm sure this move is gonna earn FLOSS many fans. /s
The Linux kernel has!
Linux GPL only modules: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/475654/focus=475796
My gist of the situation is the following -
(1) Bukkit took Minecraft's proprietary code, decompiled it, and tossed it into a GPL repository;
(2) Later, when Bukkit was dying, Mojang bought it out and helped lift it back up - note that they only bought the right to the repository and infrastructure, NOT to the code base;
(3) After a while, one disgruntled developer (who probably wasn't happy that he wasn't going to get paid by Mojang soon) files a DMCA to remove his code. (I mention pay because the original Bukkit developers were hired by Mojang, and the author in question was the "second wave" after the initial hire. Again, just an opinion, not fact.)
I am not a lawyer, but my interpretation of this is really simple:
(1) The DMCA claim is 100% valid as the code is owned by its author, and he has the right to remove it;
(2) However, although it's legal, the "consensus" is that the author took a rather dramatic approach; and
(3) The legality of the entire project is a big gray mess. To be specific, this project can be completely void due to the fact that GPL licensed code links against proprietary code, which is a big no-no. Proprietary code with the intent of using GPL code can force the proprietary code to become open source, but the reverse is not true. Honestly, if Mojang really wanted to, they can counter DMCA for the entire project (assuming they relinquish control over the entire project, and/or their indirect permission to use Mojang proprietary code). They probably won't because this is a legal mess on both sides.
What does this have to do with the Linux kernel? Simply put, mixing GPL and proprietary code will NOT work. Much less so with GPL code linking to proprietary code.
Solutions? Hopefully the two can work it out (but from the looks of it, the DMCA issuing party may not be that willing). Alternatively, if Mojang wanted to one-up the author, they can do a cleanroom implementation of this guy's code, re-integrate it, and call it a day.
All this dev is going to do is piss off a lot of people with his same skill set.
It hits the point squarely on the head... Mojang is not at fault here.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
If Bukkit contains that decompiled code, then it was probably never really GPLed (in spite of people working on it with the belief that it was GPLed), because the guy who made it (and said it was GPLed) wasn't the copyright holder. Whoever made MC is the copyright holder and Bukkit is a derived work.
Say I take a DLL that comes with Microsoft Windows, decompile it, modify that "source" and compile it. Do I hold the copyright of the resulting binary, or does Microsoft? Pretty sure there are a few centuries of precedent that it's Microsoft's. Therefore it isn't for me to say what license applies to that binary. Ask Microsoft, not me. Just please don't tell 'em I sent you. ;-)
Okay, I totally get how you can decompile java code, but I do not see how, after obfuscating, one is *EVER* going to get back to something that resembles the original source code from the binary. It was my understanding that once you have obfuscated a java program, all of the identifiers from the original source code which might otherwise be visible in an ordinary java decompile are irreversibly mangled... it becomes intractable to even identify general pattern use, let alone any actual source code copying.
I call shenanigans... I don't see how any alleged deobfuscation tool could be used to see what they are talking about.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Should have used BSD license.
Exactly. The fact that CraftBukkit and Bukkit are covered by the LGPL and GPL respectively is immaterial. Minecraft is simply a binary blob that is required to make the (L)GPL licensed software work, one which is easily separable from the deliverable so no ones license, except at once point Mojang's, was ever being infringed.
The GPL makes no requirement to release source to the public. Only to release source to the recipient of the compiled program.
Short version: Some dude made a false DMCA claim. Threw in "GPL" to try for sympathy. Some other dudes are scared about it instead of simply telling him to take a long walk off a short pier.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
Guys, get it straight.
You can LINK proprietary software with GPL software and use said software, provided proprietary software does not have a licensing clause to disallow it. What you are no longer permitted to is distribute the combination thereof
Is that clear? For example use mplayer. You can compile and link in non-free codecs. But then mplayer binary is no longer distributable. If you distribute said mplayer binary, that is a copyright violation.
Is that clear now?
So, it's bullshit that GPL doesn't allow you to link with GPL-conflicting software. But if you do link, you CANNOT distribute said software. That's the only problem. GPL does not prevent the user from using GPL software as they see fit. It simply prevents them from limiting the user's users from further limitations.
Glad I'm playing completely open source Minetest instead of Minecraft!
There's also Freeminer and Infiniminer, both open source. Want more?
http://reviews.squidoo.com/games-that-are-like-minecraft
Wesley wants to force Mojang to release the server code, which they have refused to do for years. Since all plugins and modded servers rely solely on the code he wrote years ago, he's using this DMCA request to pull his code and prevent anyone from using modded servers. Modded servers are the only thing that have been keeping Minecraft popular with an aging population of users who no longer find vanilla Minecraft entertaining. If Mojang continues to refuse to open source their server code, it will start having an impact on their success and profits. I suppose it's a principle of a thing for Wesley, his code is directly responsible for Minecraft's continuing revenue and popularity. And, he must feel it's unfair that Mojang has been unnecessarily stingy with the source code licensing of their server software. Not releasing is has held back server development for the game for years. His modded servers can only do so much, and they have to struggle to keep up with changes Mojang makes to the original game over time. Mojang is creating unnecessarily large amounts of work for the modding community that they themselves both benefit from and will not support or recognize in an official capacity. This is probably the best explanation you're going to get of what is going on and why.
Mojang doesn't really gain by having the popular mod system removed. The decompiled server code is in legal limbo. Really if Mojang wanted to assert a claim against it they could probably prevail at this moment. It may be an attempt to get Majang to say "No, I don't really have any rights or interest in that decompiledsever code", but instead he just said "I'm not reposible for distributing that code", leaving on the table the issue that was attempting to be forced. (The copyright bomb in the decompiled sever code)
I am not a gamer.
I am not a lawyer.
This is pure speculation on my part.
Corrections are welcome.
Mojang releases MineCraft.
Programmer # 1 thinks it is a good game, but needs some improvements. Thus, Bukkit is born.
Programmer # 2 thinks it is a good game, but improvements could be made. Thus, CraftBucket is born.
MineCraft is decompiled, then de-obfuscated. Then cleaned up for use in Bukkit. Bukkit is GPL. The decompiled de-obfuscated code is GPL'd.
Mojang is a for profit company organized, and operating out of Sweden.
Bukkit is a group of people, with no legally binding connection to each other. An unincorporated voluntary association. Perhaps an unincorporated non-profit.
CraftBucket is a group of people, with no legally binding connection to each other. An unincrporated voluntary association.Perhaps an unincorporated non-profit.
Mojang purchases both Bukkit, and CraftBucket. The purchase is not publicly announced.
CraftBucket is now part of a for-profit organization.
Bukkit is now part of a for-profit organization.
Contributers to both projects are under the impression that they are giving something to a voluntary association. The hypothetical unincorporated non-profit.
Instead, they discover that they are donating to a for-profit organization.
Oops.
Under California, Washington State, and various other states, territories, and provinces of Canada and the United States such contibuions are now a violaion of _Fair Labor Law_. The contributors have to be paid.(You can, in some instances, donate time to a non-profit, and/or voluntary association, an unincorporated non-profit. You may not donate time to a for-profit organization.)
I do not know if Swedish law is the same.
The odds are that Mojang has a business nexus in California, that requires it to adhere to all of California's laws. And that means the contributors of code, etc, have to be re-imbursed. By hiring the 3 or 4 "main developers" of the project, Mojang implicitely agreed to pay _all_ contributors to the respective projects.
The DMCA take-down of GPL code is merely a back door into forcing Mojang to pay all contributors of code to bothprojecs Futhermore, ths enfocement action wil be carried out courtesy of the Calforna attorney-general.
The DMCA notice concept that is mentioned on the summary is very well explained by Ken Liu on this article: http://www.sfwa.org/2013/03/th... it can be helpful for the people trying to enforce their copyrights
I've decompiled JAVA code. It's identical to the original code, with the caveat that the original variable names are not available. So instead of being called objectPolygonModel the variable gets called variable01. That's the only distinction. Everything else is the same. Every IF statement, every FOR loop, every method, every class, everything!
take "Wesley Wolfe" and kick his fucking teeth in. Kick the confidence/life right out of the fucker.
How in the fuck is this "law" being applied to every fucking thing anyone does? Also kill anyone enforcing DMCA claims in court. If the judge doesn't throw out the case becaus it mentions the DMCA take him out back and shoot him. Once all the DMCA-believing fucks are dead we can get on with society.
The article gives a poor summary of a complicated issue. A better, longer summary:
-Mojang releases Minecraft.
-Someone creates Bukkit, a mod API for servers. They also create CraftBukkit, a server implementation that supports the mod API. CraftBukkit is created by taking the official Minecraft server, decompiling it, manually deobfuscating it by applying numerous patches (most of of the form "a3" -> "EntityMob", "qr(arg1,arg2)" -> "lookAt(angle,Entity)", etc.) to make it readable, then modifying the result to implement the Bukkit API so that others can easily create server plugins.
-Bukkit is licensed GPL, which is probably fine. It's just an API and is not derived from Minecraft.
-CraftBukkit is licensed LGPL, which makes absolutely no sense. The vast majority of the project is based upon code copyrighted by Mojang, used without their permission. From the start, the license is invalid, but no one cares. Mojang is well aware of CraftBukkit, but decides not to go after them for copyright infringement since CraftBukkit is very widely used and almost essential for running a large public server.
-Time passes.
-Mojang hires four of the lead developers of Bukkit/CraftBukkit.
-Time passes.
-Two weeks ago, after drama related to Mojang changing the Minecraft EULA and some Bukkit/CraftBukkit developers deciding to quit the project, Mojang reveals that when they hired those developers they also "bought" the project. Exactly what this means is completely unclear; presumably Mojang got the four developers to assign their copyright to Mojang along with copyright for future work, but the wording used by Mojang is bizarre.
-A developer (not one of the four hired by Mojang) named Wesley Wolfe (wolvereness) who had made large contributions to both Bukkit and CraftBukkit is unhappy about this revelation for reasons he has not clearly explained. Wolfe submits DMCA takedown requests against anyone hosting his code. Though the morality of his actions can be argued, this is probably valid legally: he licensed his contributions to CraftBukkit under the LGPL, the terms of that license are not being met (as mentioned earlier). He did not assign his copyright to anyone, so he is free to use copyright law to enforce his claims to the code. The main legal question is whether or not he implicitly licensed the code when he contributed to the project while knowing that the LGPL license was invalid, and whether or not he can revoke that implicit license.
There are four possible outcomes:
-Mojang decides that they want the CraftBukkit project to continue. Mojang open-sources or licenses their server code, making the license used by CraftBukkit valid. Note that Mojang has no legal obligation to do this. Very unlikely.
-CraftBukkit dies. People switch work to some other decompiled server with a proper license and hope that Mojang continues to turn a blind eye. Or people work on a server written from scratch not based upon decompilation of Minecraft, such as the "Glowstone" server. Will take months or years. Most likely.
-Mojang gets in gear, finally finishes work on the mod API they've been promising for the last I-don't-know-how-many years.
-Someone somehow convinces Wolfe to drop his claim, be it through money, legal threats, etc. Not very likely, given that *any* CraftBukkit developer except the four hired by Mojang could do what Wolfe has done, and they would then require the same convincing.
-Wolfe's claim is ruled invalid in court. Unlikely.
Be that as it may, this doesnt's change much to the discussion or conclusions in GP, because distribution is what was happening and distribution is what this DMCA takedown is stopping.
I don't think so (but it makes me want to read that part of DMCA more carefully).
[half-assed speculation] I think it's very possible that DMCA takedowns can be lawfully issued against parties whom are licensed.
Say I write a play, "The Emperor in Orange." You and I negotiate a contract where you give me a million dollars and I give you license to publish my play. You make it available (totally legally and with my authorization) on a website. Then I find out that reading my play is driving people insane and I don't want the liability problems (psychiatrists are expensive). As the copyright holder, I can issue a DMCA takedown against your ISP, demanding they terminate the hosting of my play (which they're doing on your behalf).
It sounds absurd, at first, but hold on. Getting a DMCA takedown doesn't mean you can't publish something. It just means that now the ISP needs to pass the buck to you, and you need to either give up, or you counter-notice. Takedowns and counter-notices are just intended for getting proxies out of the picture so that the two truly-conflicting parties can fight.
If you give up (or if, as is currently pretty common, the shitty ISP pulls the content without even forwarding the DMCA notice to you), then you are unfairly screwed. Sucks to be you. Nobody ever said laws are fair, and in fact a lot of people have bitched about this aspect of DMCA for the last 15 years.
It's if you say "oh, hell no, I paid for the right to publish that play and I have the contract to prove it," and you file a counter-notice, that things go differently. At this point I have your counter-notice, which includes the info I need for my lawyer to contact you or your lawyer. (It also seems to include your hand-written note where you scrawled, "bring it on, asshole" which .. *sniff* did you write this in shit instead of ink?!?)
You just called my bluff. We're done with DMCA at this point, and now I need to either stupidly sue you (and lose; it's if we go to court that you show everyone your license, and the judge starts asking me unpleasant questions that have the word "vexatious" highly emphasized) or maybe win (because you're too poor to fight), or I need to stop being a douchebag and ask you nicely or negotiate a new contract (which probably involves you getting your million dollars back). And if you don't negotiate, then it sucks to be me. I guess I'll be paying the nation's psychiatric bills.
Copyright holders are always in a position to issue takedowns. The request is valid, it just may also be pointless and needlessly antagonistic.
I think all the licensing issues (and especially GPL's terms) are sort of irrelevant at this point. What really matters is who is the copyright holder.
I'm reading conflicting facts here, where some people are saying Bukkit is based on reverse-engineered .. something (protocol info, maybe?). If that's all that happened, then Wolfe is the copyright holder and can issue takedowns (but the GPL issues are then going to come up).
But other people are saying Bukkit contains decompiled Minecraft Server code. Reading decompiled code is one thing, and part of RE, but distributing that code or using it as a starting point for your improved server, is a whole other thing.
So which is it? Is Bukkit a derivative work (whose creation probably involved some reverse engineering) for which "who is copyright holder?" is a touchy subject, or is it merely a new expression of a reverse-engineered protocol (where Wolfe is clearly the copyright holder)?
Oddly enough there doesn't seem to be a programmer in the bunch, hardly any at best. I read through quite a bit of the comments and the obvious solutions are expounded at truth: Mojang must release their server code as it was included in a GPL licensed download even though the code was reverse engineered and that only partly. The Wesley Wolfe developer wrote some code, distributed it via GPL but maintained copyright, thus implying that it is not GPL3. He published a DMCA request while wanting Mojang to release their proprietary code and intends to hold fast until they do.
Copyright not being assigned is one of the reasons to use GPL3 (and I do not use it, BTW). But ignorance on the web is not new nor news. Declaring that Mojang is evil, will perish, should perish and whatever are quite funny as the unread mass on those forums are mostly just users.
What this is should be a wake up call to making sure that you have an adequate exit play for players like Wesley Wolfe when they get their confused little non-legal minds in a snit. I recall a certain VLC developer that pulled VLC from apple and claimed it wasn't his fault (even after apple pulled it down stating that he, RÃf©mi Denis-Courmont, was indeed the reason). So, yes the stigma with acts like this should stick even to Wesley Wolfe.
And a few had reasonable things to say but those were few and far between.
Okay, I read the articles, and I cannot keep the parties straight. Who did what and who is claiming what? Can this be expressed as a simple bulleted list. Too much lawyer. Many nomenclature
While this case is a little bit odd (with all the mixed-up parties, mixed up copyrights, mixed-up codes, mixed-up claims) we shouldn't let ourselves be confused by it
Instead, if we take a step back the picture looks clear --- it's the DMCA that is fueling all these takedown requests
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
What if Minecraft releases the decompiled code with GPL license?
Now we have GPL Trolls...
Not saying the GPL doesn't have its place, but in a case where you accept direct submissions from others, i think the BSD licensing model would have been safer..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Then there is one simple solution DMCA Counternotice
Take the service provider off the hook. If the developer then wants to continue to pursue that line of argument, then he/she will have to sue Mojang. In order to claim any statutory damages in doing so, the developer will have to have registered the copyrights formally with the copyright office when the work was originally done.
CraftBukkit is a software distribution that combines Bukkit code with decompiled Minecraft server code. Bukkit is licensed under the GPL and Wolfe has code in it.
For some context to make Wolfe's actions make more sense: one of the main Bukkit developers stepped down (probably related to the fact he knew the Bukkit licensing was a timebomb) and said that the Bukkit project was being ended. Mojang then claimed that they owned the project (after hiring some of the developers years ago) and were going to continue it without him. People had tried to push Mojang to clarify/fix Bukkit's licensing for a long time, but Mojang never did. Wolfe sort of called them out for their hypocrisy of never fixing its licensing while they were increasingly relying on it.
Spigot mentions "Additionally access to the Spigot source code repository has been forcibly removed from GitHub following a similar DMCA takedown."
There's no way to credibly claim a GPL violation resulting from distribution of the source code.
People are acting as if Wesley Wolfe (Wolvereness) is trying to claim ownership of Minecraft server code. I don't know him, but that is not his intent from what I've seen. It is simply to have his code removed from a project with a clear conflict of interest over licensing. From what I have seen, it has been a case of: 'remove my code from the project OR opensource the Minecraft server code'.
The fact that this brings to light that Bukkit is no longer eligible to use its codebase because it's in violation of its own license is just a bonus.
Unfortunately Spigot is suffering from a side-effect of this claim. It was built off the Bukkit source code, so if Wolvereness were to leave his code in that project, without a DMCA claim, it would dilute his legal position against Mojang.
Here are the facts as I see them:
1. Bukkit is an open source project, licensed under the GPL.
2. Many developers, including Wolfe, contribute code to the project under the GPL terms. The developers retain copyright over their contributions.
3. The Minecraft server was reverse engineered (apparently in violation of Minecraft's EULA) and the resulting decompiled/de-obfuscated code initially included in the CraftBukkit project.
4. Projects like Bukkit, Forge and Spigot add considerable value to Minecraft, but are not (initially) controlled by Mojang.
5. Mojang surreptitiously acquires the Bukkit project by hiring a number of the project's key developers. While the hiring of the developers is made public, the acquisition of the project is not.
6. The developers Mojang hire work on Bukkit-Minecraft "intergration". Bukkit features get added to Minecraft's server, and proprietary Minecraft server code gets incorporated into Bukkit/CraftBukkit.
7. Community developers continue to contribute to Bukkit, under the GPL, thinking they are working for an independent project.
8. Bukkit/CraftBukkit is distributed during this time, under the (L)GPL, including the proprietary code. This is a violation of the (L)GPL.
9. Mojang changes EULA to prevent 'pay to win' servers, and asserts Bukkit is subject to that EULA too.
10. The majority of developers vote to discontinue the project. Mojang steps in publicly to say that they can't do that and they have owned the project for two years.
11. Mojang asserts control over the entire project, including contributions from community.
12. Wolvereness DMCAs the project, for the removal of his code.
13. Mojang claim they added no code to the project, yet the project had been distributed for two years including Minecraft server code while the project was supposedly in Mojang's ownership. Mojang have been aware of licensing issues since 2011, but have done nothing to remove their proprietary code from a GPLed project in the time since they acquired it. Licensing of the project has not changed.
It seems that there are only four possibilities: Mojang kills Bukkit and walks away; Mojang rewrites Bukkit to remove/rewrite code from outside contributors and closes source; Mojang caves and opensources Minecraft server code; Mojang takes Wolfe to court to determine outcome (which could take years of appeals).
Now forced to go outside and play. ;-)
The issue is he may never have had the right to release the derivative he did. So the original decompile/redistribution of Micecraft's code is not legal. That people said it was GPL doesn't make it so. It was an illegal distribution of copyrighted code. Mojang didn't care and didn't stop it, but it was illegal all the same. Well what that means is that if you then made a derivative of that, it wasn't legal either. He didn't have a license to distribute a derivative work and thus he can't go and declare it to be GPL.
So now the issue comes down to the part of the code he wrote. Well that is his... maybe. The problem is that his derivative was never legal in the first place. So a court could, and probably would, award control to Mojang. This has happened in music before. Someone makes a remix without permission and the work then gets granted to the original copyright owner.
If this kid pushes it, it is likely to end up badly for him. He would likely lose rights to the code, have to pay court costs and then, if they were feeling evil, could go after him for the illegal derivative work.
Basically if you make a derivative of someone's work and you don't have explicit permission to, either from them directly or via a license like the GPL, you need to be ok with them making use of that derivative if they want to, because you aren't going to win that fight. Maybe you don't think that is how it should be, but that's how it is. Copyright owners maintain control over their work, even if they choose to overlook a given violation. It isn't "protect it or lose it" like with trademark.
1) Modders hate Minecraft Server code because it does nothing but play minecraft.
2) Modders Steal Minecraft Server code, Modify it, and GPL it. Thus Developing Bukkit
3) Other Coders as well as original Modders (now Bukkit Devs) add Code to Bukkit to make it better.
4) Mojang instead of DMCA'ing the Hell out of Bukkit, hires all major Bukkit Devs, Allows Bukkit to continue.
5) Mojang enforces clause in EULA, making Play to Win servers Illegal. Since P2W is the primary method most MC Servers survive on, Drama Ensues.
6) Lead Bukkit Dev over EULA Enforcement pulls a Cartman, Says "Screw you Guys! I'm A Goin Hume" and ends bukkit.
7) Mojang says "Not so fast! We bought Bukkit when we hired devs and the original devs will continue it". Since Bukkit asset sales were never disclosed when the devs got hired, More Drama Ensues.
8) Wolvereness asks Mojang if Stolen MC code is GPL since they own Bukkit now. Mojang says No. DMCA's Bukkit and all derivatives due to stolen MC code not GPL'd and Therefore GPL on Bukkit is not valid and he wants his code back.
Run that by me again? "Play to Win" is how it's supposed to work.
Well.... to be a genuine issue it would have to be statically linked, otherwise you would do the obvious and just distribute them separately. So is that what's happening here? I doubt it, since the original server is presumably unmodifiable.
...how much Slashdot hates on people. I always forget that intelligence and empathy are not positively correlated.
Who cares if the guy is butthurt? If he thinks an injustice has been done, good for him for doing something. The rest of us just take it in the rear - which is funny because that would make us the ones who are butthurt.
Anyway, is he in the right or wrong? I have no clue, but that doesn't invalidate how painful it is to work on a project (for free) and be shafted (in his eyes). Is he mad for not getting hired? Maybe, but I would be too. We all know how much favoritism and politics play into hiring and firing - is it that hard to believe he might actually have been treated unfairly? Maybe he was treated fairly, but the sentiment seems to be that he should just f-off and die no matter what.
Aren't we human? Shouldn't we try and see ourselves in his shoes instead of lashing out with jealousy. Maybe it's not jealousy, but how else can I explain the anger some people have with this situation, when they have no pony in the race. Of course, it's everyone's right to feel incensed, but geez, can't we be compassionate for a change take it easy on the guy? It's not like he sits in his room creating a master evil plan on how to use his code to take over the world.
Some commenters have pointed out that Wolfe was in the wrong first. Let's say that's the case - that doesn't mean he forfeits his right to not be wronged himself. If I steal from you and get away with it, does that mean you should be allowed to steal from me afterwards? I'm not equating stealing with this situation. Heck, I can't even really comprehend any of the terminology, but I understand enough to know that no one has the full story yet. To me, this means it's too early to condemn either side.
I guess this is where someone says "You realize you're on Slashdot, right?"
Thanks for the rant space =)
Here's what happened, taking away people's motivations and leaving only the legal/software stuff.
There are 3 distinct projects:
1. The Minecraft server, in this case decompiled. It has a proprietary license, and Mojang have been tacitly allowing it to be distributed.
2. Bukkit, a GPL library that could theoretically handle plugins for many Minecraft like games, although it's really only useful for Minecraft.
3. Craftbukkit, which statically links both Bukkit and Minecraft.
Now, here's the relevant section of the GPL FAQ, where it states that you cannot distribute a GPL and a proprietary program statically linked together.
A contributer to Bukkit (not Craftbukkit) for certain reasons blew the GPL whistle, and had Craftbukkit taken down for GPL violations.
Lot of rants here are including the words "illegal" and "reverse engineering". Someone might want to explain to people that the idea that the idea that the words automatic go together is a rent seekers wet dream and not true in critical ways.
Stating that the API will not be bukkit, but something else. Bukkit is simply the only thing out there at the moment until they, eventually, release an official API.
Wolfe needs to realize that when he (she?) donated his code to the Bukkit project, he lost his rights to licensing that code, as it became part and parcel of the Bukkit project as a whole, which subsequently is licensed under a GNU license. The Bukkit project started out by reverse engineering Mojang's code, decompiling in order to be able to write the API (which allows other authors (some as young as 12 years old) to contribute to the ecology of Minecraft servers) Strictly speaking, this could be seen as an illegal action which infringed upon Mojang's rights. However, seeing as Mojang now owns the Bukkit project (and continues to refuse to implement it as the official Minecraft API), the previous point is moot. Mojang, as far as I know, has no plans to use Bukkit (and subsequently CraftBukkit) for any purposes other than in the spirit of the original project goal. This, for the Minecraft community, is for the most part a non-issue as there are several project admins forming a new project to replace Bukkit. And with 4 years to learn from experience, be much better, and without using any Bukkit code. Though, I'm sure there will be many similarities due to the static nature of Minecraft Server code which there is no option but to use the way it is.
In my opinion, Wolfe has no rights what so ever to any code in Bukkit, CraftBukkit or any derivative works thereof (Spigot, ForgeBukkit, etc). The only events this kerfuffle has caused is many of the Bukkit developers and supporting staff to resign, the acknoledgement of ownership of Bukkit by Mojang, and several new projects which will replace Bukkit.
That still makes him wrong. Contributing code to an open project and then retroactively trying to ransom it back is a dick move however you spin it.
Anyone doing that is a twat, either don't do the work in the first place, or accept it's out there and let people do what they want. Don't put it out there and then bitch about people using it.
If you have a problem with the project, stop working on it and move the fuck on. Don't try and ruin everyone else's fun over your hissy fit and start making petty demands and threats.
There's an awful lot of guesswork and name-calling going on here, and a sense that the argument is divided into "Mojang sux!" and "Mojang rulez!" camps. The truth is of course, way more complex. Here's an attempt to lay out some (hopefully) objective facts, mixed with my subjective opinion. Disclaimer: I've been involved with Bukkit for over 3 years as a plugin developer and contributor to the forums, and (very minor) contributor to the Bukkit project itself.
* The Bukkit project was started late 2010/beginning 2011 as a replacement for hMod, an earlier server mod, by 4 people: Dinnerbone, EvilSeph, Tahg and Grum.
* The Bukkit project consists of two main deliverables: the Bukkit API, licensed under the GPL, and the CraftBukkit server, licensed under the LGPL.
* The Bukkit API contains no Mojang code. It's the Java JAR against which Bukkit plugins are compiled.
* The CraftBukkit server contains a copy of the Bukkit API (via Maven shading), some original Java classes in the org.bukkit.craftbukkit Java package (most of which either implement Bukkit API interfaces or serve as glue code between Bukkit and Mojang's own code), and decompiled/semi-deobfuscated copies of Mojang classes from Mojang's official minecraft_server.jar.
* Effectively craftbukkit.jar contains code with three separate licenses: GPL, LGPL, and Mojang's proprietary license. My opinion: "what the hell were the Bukkit team thinking when they chose this license model?"
* Mojang were presumably aware of CraftBukkit from the start, it being the pre-eminent server modding platform, but chose not to take any legal action over the inclusion of (decompiled copies of) their code in a GPL'd project. In fact, Mojang even went so far as to supply deobfuscation mappings to the original Bukkit team, so it's very clear that they supported the Bukkit project. My opinion: "of course they would, it's helped their sales enormously"
* Early 2012, Mojang announced that the original Bukkit team (Dinnerbone, EvilSeph, Tahg and Grum) were being hired to work on Mojang's own planned modding API. Note that this API had been announced some time before, and has yet to materialise.
* Apparently at the same time, Mojang also acquired rights to the entire Bukkit project. This, however, was not publicised.
* The Bukkit project continued under new direct leadership (mainly feildmaster, Wolvereness and Amaranth) after the original team were hired by Mojang. feildmaster recently stated that Mojang stopped providing deobfuscation mappings shortly after the original team were hired. However, Mojang allowed the project to continue, and did not take any legal action over the CraftBukkit server.
* EvilSeph left Mojang shortly after, and is the only member of the original four to remain involved with the Bukkit project.
* Cut to last month: EvilSeph posted an announcement that the Bukkit project was being ended, due to the increasing difficulty of updating it for new Minecraft releases (remember: no more deobfuscation mappings from Mojang), and concerns of its legal status being exacerbated by Mojang's recent EULA changes.
* At this point, Mojang sprang into action, asserting ownership over the entire Bukkit project. Dinnerbone tweeted that he'd personally update Bukkit for the new Minecraft 1.8 release. Mojang's Jeb confirmed that Mojang owns Bukkit (I quote his tweet: "we checked the receipts"), having acquired it when the original four joined Mojang in 2012.
* The revelation over Mojang's ownership of Bukkit caused very significant consternation for many contributors to the project (there are around 170 individuals, including myself, who have contributed code licensed under the GPL).
* Wesley Wolfe aka Wolvereness, one of the new Bukkit dev team leaders, filed a DMCA takedown notice on Sep 5th, on the grounds that Mojang cannot legally distribute CraftBukkit when it contains both GPL'd code from him, and proprietary code from Mojang.
* In the last couple of days, pretty much all of the existing Bukkit staff (forum administration, p
He's not trying to ransom it back. At no point has there been a suggestion that Wolvereness wants any kind of material gain for his code. He's unhappy that the GPL code he contributed to Bukkit is now being distributed by Mojang in breach of the GPL.
The whole world isn't as relaxed about legal issues as Mojang. So these legal issues has to be taken seriously. CraftBukkit is not the first open source project tightly tied to a non open source one in this way. The usual solution is to release the project under a modified version of the open source license which explicitly allows what needs to be allowed. If CraftBukkit was released under a license which allowed it to be distributed linked to the Minecraft server code then the problem could be avoided. Developers who would not accept their code to be relicensed in this way would probably not accept the premise of the project to begin with.
The violation is not on the decompiled code, but on the mod itself, whose license says it can not be linked with non gpl code. Of course, that is exactly how the mod has been used sine its inception and the only way in which it could be, so obviously he intended it to be used that way and only now is using this technicality to try and stop people from using his code, either because he is butt hurt, or because he now wants paid.
Though will take a bit of time...
Mojang, implements an API service into the Minecraft Server.
Mojang, has developers modify the Bukkit code to no longer access the decompiled-reverse engineered server code, but rather the server's public API calls.
Now, Bukkit has been decoupled from the server. And is no longer in violation of GPL, and all of the contributions are not GPL valid. Problem solved.
Granted this takes, time, coders, and $$$.
He is not claiming that minecraft must be gpl. He is claiming that you can not link his code with minecraft *because* it is not gpl. Technically if they made minecraft gpl, then you could, but he knows full well that will never happen.
He's telling them to open source the proprietary Minecraft server source code at the barrel of a DMCA notice that is extremely popular, broadly used and financed by Mojang. How is that not a ransom?
Telling someone they can either suffer a crippling of a product they support or to hand over some entirely non-GPL source code is direct a ransom as it gets - demanding the Minecraft server source code - something that isn't his but that he's demanding - absolutely is a demand for material gain.
Decompiling someone else's code does not change the fact that it belongs to them, and you are violating their copyright if you distribute said decompiled code without a license from them.
"Cleanroom" means you wrote your own minecraft server yourself, *without* looking at mojang's code.
Just because Mojang releases bukkit and part of bukkit is (l)gpl, it in no way compels them to release the other part under the same license. They could, but they have to choose to do so, and they won't. Also if bukkit *were* lgpl, then this guy would not have a case, since lgpl does permit linking with non free software, but the gpl does not, which is why bukkit is violating his copyright, as it always has, no matter who is releasing it.
He is not alleging that anyone but mojang has a copyright interest in either the original or decompiled minecraft code. He is claiming that under the gpl he licensed bukkit under, you are not allowed to link it with non gpl software, which the minecraft server is, and therefore, mojang can not distribute bukkit ( unless they decide to license minecraft server under gpl ).
The decompiled code doesn't have to look like the original source code any more than the compiled byte code does; under copyright law, it is a derived work, and therefore subject to the same copyright as the original work.
If this were not the case then you could freely copy anyone's code just by decompiling and recompiling it.
Stop being dense. He's not demanding the "Minecraft server source code" and no one who's actually paying attention has ever claimed that. He's saying that his GPL'd contributions can't legally be distributed in CraftBukkit along with Mojang's proprietary classes, and in that respect he's correct.
Of course this has been the case all along - CraftBukkit has never been legally licensed - but until now both Mojang and the Bukkit development team have basically swept that problem under the carpet. What gotten Wolfe (and no doubt other) contributors annoyed is that Mojang concealed their ownership of Bukkit until the current Bukkit team basically threw in the towel due to the difficulty of keeping CraftBukkit up-to-date wrt. Minecraft. At the point, Mojang basically said, "no problem, we've actually owned Bukkit all along!".
This is the fault of the original Bukkit team (who are now Mojang employees, or have been) for their poor licensing decisions, and also the fault of Mojang for failing to deal with the licensing problems either initially or when they clandestinely acquired the Bukkit project. Wolfe and other contributors may be accused of poor judgement for continuing to contribute to such a legally shaky project, but the original licensing problems are not theirs, and their contributions were made under the false belief that Bukkit remained a community-owned project.
There's nothing dense about understanding that if you demand proprietary source code be made available that you're demanding access to the source code. It's really not rocket science and I can see why you FOSS zealots have such a bad name.
I don't really take issue with him being offended by some going on or another, but giving someone a choice of shutting down one project or open sourcing another because of some pet peeve is just a real dick thing to do. There's nothing wrong with the status quo unless Mojang decides to enforce the fact that their code was originally used illegally, something they've chosen not to do instead preferring to support their fan community.
You may think there's some technicality here or there that makes him right but it doesn't really matter. Other companies, other developers look at this and it's the sort of petty pathetic childishness that turns people away from open source software and giving that community access or support for anything. If there's a danger you're going to get burnt working with the FOSS community then why the fuck would you want to go near it?
I can't quite tell if you're a bit dim, or just being deliberately obtuse here. Wolfe has never demanded that Mojang release their proprietary source code (and he doesn't have the legal right to do that anyway). He's saying, correctly, that CraftBukkit cannot legally be distributed under its current license. It can certainly be argued that this is a petty move - he is basically making the entire project unavailable to everyone - and I'm in two minds about that myself, but it's a bit more than just a "pet peeve". It's two years of his work (and Wolfe was one of the biggest contributors to the project) under basically false pretences.
It's now up to Mojang to decide how to proceed. They have several choices, only one of which is re-licensing their server code under the GPL (and I very much doubt that will happen). They could alternatively shelve the Bukkit project (they are after all working on their own modding API), or they could meet Wolfe in court.
The problem is not entirely Mojang's fault, but they have basically been storing up trouble for themselves since the release of CraftBukkit in January 2011 by not dealing with the license issue then. It seems pretty clear they wanted the Bukkit project to continue (let's face it, it's certainly helped their bottom line), up to and including acquiring the project, but it was foolish of them not to immediately clarify the licence.
By the way, using the blanket insult "you FOSS zealots" says a lot more about you than it does me. You know nothing about me, or my overall stance on software licensing.
You keep using the word dim as an insult towards me yet seem to repeatedly be unable to grasp the concept that offering the open sourcing of the Minecraft server source code as a solution to the problem he has decided to create is identical to asking for the Minecraft source code, I'm not sure why you struggle with with such a simple concept, but apparently you do. Maybe you're, well, a bit dim?
"It's two years of his work (and Wolfe was one of the biggest contributors to the project) under basically false pretences."
Well no, it's not false pretences at all, he knew both the licensing situation and that he was working for free and should've known that no one owed him jack shit. The fact he apparently understood none of this is entirely his own stupid fault.
"By the way, using the blanket insult "you FOSS zealots" says a lot more about you than it does me. You know nothing about me, or my overall stance on software licensing."
What I know is that you're defending an indefensible action that only FOSS zealots would defend and that is precisely the reason companies and developers are put off working with the FOSS community. Whatever you may think you are, that's good enough for me to call a spade a spade and if you don't like it, then well, tough shit- that's what you get when you defend the indefensible.
A far more mature and sensible solution to the problem would be to publicly air your distaste, walk away and get the fuck over it. It's not difficult, except for this guy who seems to have a childish grudge and determination to enact revenge for his own stupidity in working on something where the licensing wasn't clear it seems. Would you seriously start in a job where the contract was written in a manner where you may find you don't get paid for your work at the end of the day? No of course you wouldn't, but if you did and didn't get paid then what the hell would you expect? No one owes this guy anything, he volunteered his times and that was entirely upto him, it doesn't give him the right to fuck everyone else.
You keep using the word dim as an insult towards me yet seem to repeatedly be unable to grasp the concept that offering the open sourcing of the Minecraft server source code as a solution to the problem he has decided to create is identical to asking for the Minecraft source code, I'm not sure why you struggle with with such a simple concept, but apparently you do. Maybe you're, well, a bit dim?
I've used the term dim once, so I'm not sure why you think I "keep" using it; however, I've come to the conclusion that it's pretty well merited here. I'll say it once more, in the probably vain hope that you'll actually read it: Wolfe has neither asked for nor offered the open sourcing of Mojang's server source code. Once again: you made that part up yourself.
From the summary:
"The programmer says that Mojang must release the Minecraft server code to the public domain since decompiled, deobfuscated versions of the Java code are included in the Bukkit project before he will withdraw the DMCA."
Again, it seems it's not be who is "a bit dim", unless of course you're saying I made up the summary, but I doubt you're accusing me of going to the extreme of hacking Slashdot so I can only concur that you just didn't read it yourself and are being wilfully ignorant so as to not admit that yes you were in fact completely wrong.
Ah, I see now. You blindly believed the Slashdot summary (which is in fact a load of bollocks) without doing any research yourself. Never a good idea.