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.
NM. I found a post on Reddit that clarified it.
Wolfe contributed code to Bukkit that was GPLed but was violating Mojang's license because it wasn't licensed under the GPL or similar. Mojang just chose to otherwise ignore the violation, but then has since acquired Bukkit. As soon as Mojang made a release, they infringed on Wolfe's GPL code contribution when they didn't release the source to the bundled Mindcraft server.
Sounds to me that Wolfe's contribution wasn't covered under a valid license to begin with. That would mean that Mojang doesn't get to automatically use his code anyways, but also doesn't mean that Mojang needs to open Mindcraft up. Mojang just paid money for an incomplete product.
There are three pieces of software involved: Bukkit, CraftBukkit, and Minecraft server. Bukkit and CraftBukkit are released under the GPL. Minecraft is not. Bukkit and CraftBukkit are both totally and utterly useless without Minecraft server, and have to be linked against reverse-engineered Minecraft source code in order to function, thus creating a GPL violation that has existed for years. Nobody cared though, because they were too busy playing the game.
At some point in the past Mojang hired four of the developers of Bukkit/CraftBukkit and bought the rights to use the name Bukkit. But they neglected to obtain copyright assignments from all contributors and as such do not hold the copyright necessary to relicense Bukkit/CraftBukkit in a way that would legally allow them to distribute it.
Then yesterday, one of the other contributors to Bukkit/CraftBukkit asserted a DCMA claim to stop the distribution of said project.
The developers of Minecraft are NOT using GPL code.
The Minecraft modders are using some of the Minecraft code (as a result of decompilation and related techniques).
One of the Minecraft modders wants to force the developers of Minecraft to open source their code by refusing to allow his code to link to their (deobfuscated/decompiled) code.
Since a lot of Minecrafters depend on this modders code, he's hoping he gets enough support to force the developers of Minecraft to, basically, give him their code.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
It's also worth noting that Mojang has never contributed code to Bukkit or CraftBukkit. The codebases are therefore entirely separate, except for Bukkit/CB's usage of reverse engineered source, which goes one way only (and not the way that would logically let you assess ownership of Minecraft's server source).
There are three parties: Wesley Wolfe (who wrote GPL code included in the project and issued the DMCA notice), the author(s) of the server code (which allegedly is included in the mod in some way) and the author(s) of the mod (who are accused of violating the GPL by mixing proprietary code with GPL code).
It would have been nice if the submitter had included the original claim, which is reported here. Quote:
My name is Wesley Wolfe. A site hosted on an IP address owned by Multiplay
(ip redacted) is infringing on my software copyright by the distribution
of a software known as CraftBukkit.
Original content can be found at
https://github.com/Wolvereness/Bukkit-Bleeding/commits?author=Wolvereness
https://github.com/Wolvereness/Bukkit-Bleeding/commit/0a0fee8be25bf8a732abff2d66a89a64614b6327
and the appropriate license for previously mentioned content can be found at
https://github.com/Wolvereness/Bukkit-Bleeding/blob/f210234e59275330f83b994e199c76f6abd41ee7/LICENCE.txt
The provided license requires the use of included or linking code to
provide the original source under the GNU GPL license version 3, or any
later version. An official notice has been sent to Mojang AB, whereas the
Chief Operating Officer, Vu Bui, responded with the clear text:
Mojang has not authorized the inclusion of any of its proprietary
Minecraft software (including its Minecraft Server software) within the
Bukkit project to be included in or made subject to any GPL or LGPL
license, or indeed any other open source license
As the Minecraft Server software is included in CraftBukkit, and the
original code has not been provided or its use authorized, this is a
violation of my copyright. I have a good faith belief the distribution of
CraftBukkit includes content of which the distribution is not authorized by
the copyright owner, it's agent, or the law.
IMHO, if the information about what's included in what is accurate, the DMCA notice and license complaint is legitimate. The inclusion of his GPL code in the mode requires that the remaining mod code be open-sourced, but the author(s) of the proprietary server code which is allegedly included in the mod have not authorized their code to be open-sourced. Lack of source for the complete mod is a GPL violation. If the mod authors aren't authorized to use the server code, then that may be a violation of the server author(s)' license as well, but that's irrelevant with regard to this DMCA takedown notice. A weak point could be that he may have contributed his GPL code knowing that there is proprietary code in the project. On the other hand, he may have contributed his code believing that the project already contained other GPL code and would abide by the license.
Apparently Mojang, since they bought Bukkit, are using GPL code which is in Bukkit. Mojang also owns Minecraft. Parts of Minecraft are allegedly also included in Bukkit, but the source to these parts of Bukkit (and Minecraft) is not provided, which makes the distribution of Bukkit a license violation.
Contrary to popular opinion, the GPL doesn't give anyone the right to force open-sourcing (or "assess ownership") of code anyway. Without making linked code open source as well, distributing it linked to the GPL code is merely a copyright violation, because the GPL doesn't cover that. A copyright violation does not automatically have to be healed by fulfilling the license requirements. The author of the code which is distributed without a valid license however has the right to stop that copyright violation, which is what has happened here.
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.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
2. Wolfe contributes code to bukkit
3. Mojang buys bukkit
4. Mojang releases update to bukkit that includes decompiled code and wolfe's GPL'd contributions.
Wolfe believes point #4 is what makes the problems. Mojang has now released a piece of software that includes their own decompiled code and wolfe's gpl code. Wolfe believes the fact that the MineCraft server code was sent through the washing machine (compiled-decompiled-compiled) before being released is irrelevant to the gpl license, so the original server code must be released.
Wolfe never claimed that the Minecraft is distributed in violation of the GPL. He rightly claims that Bukkit is distributed in violation of the GPL, because it contains parts of Minecraft server that aren't licensed under the GPL, and that license violation is grounds for the DMCA takedown (no license to distribute means distribution is a copyright violation, thus the justified takedown notice). The submitter, apparently in an attempt to sway opinions, omitted a link to the actual takedown notice or any other source explaining the claim. Instead we get to read only the other side's responses and conjectures ("must release the Minecraft server code") which are not supported by the actual claim.
Calling an author of software that you want to use for free an "asshole" just because he insists that the license of his code is not violated is indeed being an ungrateful little shit.
It's a little more complicated than that.
You didnt just write some GPL piece of software for windows, you wrote some GPL software that is so tightly integrated with Windows you actually had to reverse engineer parts of Windows and replace original system files with new ones, composed in part of what we think of as your program, and in part of your reverse-engineered best guess on the original Windows system code. Probably problematic to distributed, if Microsoft had cared, but it was boosting their sales so they didnt raise any fuss. In fact, they turned around and bought out your company instead. Took over operations, but critically did not receive the copyright to this GPL software (which was always, if I am not mistaken, owned by the contributors, not the company.)
This is where it gets tricky. Now THEY are the ones distributing your GPL code linked to their own code, not your reverse-engineered stand-in. I am not 100% sure I am getting that part correct, but it seems to be the case. And if it is the case... then at that point Microsoft would actually be in violation of your license. They would have, as I see it, three options. They could simply quit using your code entirely, which they obviously do not want to do, and which would only prevent continuing violations but still leave them at least theoretically liable for past damages; they could GPL Windows itself, and use your code freely; or they could purchase either copyright or a side-license to continue using the code outside the GPL.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
They Decompiled and Deobfuscated the original MC code and modified it to create Bukkit.
Mojang Terms says "2) Do not redistribute our games or any alterations of our game files."
Considering that Bukkit is redistributed alterations of the original server game files, "Stole" is in the right context.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
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.
This DMCA takedown request is invalid. And it all comes down to the statement "As the Minecraft Server software is included in CraftBukkit, and the original code has not been provided or its use authorized, this is a violation of my copyright". That statement is incorrect. It is a violation of MOJANG's copyright (As they are the copyright holders of the original server software, which has been decompiled and partially deobfuscated in this case). Wolfe's contributions are licensed under the GPL, and he can't withdraw that license, so he is in no situation to order a takedown on his own code. And he can't order a takedown based on Mojang's code, as he doesn't own that copyright either.
". If somebody is using GPL code and refuses to issue source, it's cut and dried, guilty."
Wrong.
If you implement a web server, an e-commerce service, or anything involving = GPLv2-based projects but you do not distribute the binaries then you are under NO obligation to release the source code. That requirement only arises if you DISTRIBUTE binaries derived from the = GPLv2-licensed source code.
GPLv3 changes things a bit but that doesn't seem to be the issue here.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Apparently there is a project which doesn't use the proprietary code but includes the GPL code, and there is a project which combines the decompiled proprietary server code with that other project. The issue is with the second, mixed project. He can't be faulted for contributing to the pure GPL program and he can't be faulted for others taking the GPL code and integrating it with proprietary code. In fact, he is trying to use his copyright to stop the distribution of the illegal combination of the two. Additionally, the owners of the proprietary code are now also the owners of the mixed project, and they can't violate their own copyright, but they can violate his. Others, who would like to keep using the mixed code in violation of his copyright, are calling him an "asshole" on Slashdot and get modded +5 insightful for it.
Bad move when Mojang is finally making progress on their own Mod API.
Mojang's Mod API *is* Bukkit. Why do you think they hired four Bukkit developers? Why do you think this guy is pissed off in the first place?
The DMCA takedown notice is against Craftbukkit, which undisputedly contains de-/re-compiled Minecraft server code and GPL code by Wolfe. In the DMCA takedown notice, the COO of Mojang is quoted rejecting GPL licensing for any Minecraft server code. That makes the distribution of a combination of the two a GPL violation (but not a violation of the Minecraft server code copyright, because Mojang owns the project which distributes the mod, and they can't violate their own copyright.)
You are confused. No commercial entity took GPL code. What happened is that a GPL Project took commercial code. The GPL code is a derivative of the commercial code, the commercial code contains absolutely no GPL code. The GPL code is the mod.