01 Mar, 2011, Zeno wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
Came across this thread I replied in last year: http://www.mudbytes.net/topic-3186

Maybe this has been debated before my time.

So I went and downloaded the source here: http://www.seltha.net/tfe/

The code looked unique, barely any comments. But then I started seeing things. Filenames like update.cc, fight.cc, interp.h, update_handler function in update.cc with PULSE stuff etc. I kept digging but the code didn't match up to anything, just bits and pieces.

There's an area dir with a help.are file, talk about similar. I looked for names of Diku/Merc and found one helpfile "Greeting":
Quote
Thanks to

Michael Seifert, Hans Henrik Strfeldt, Tom Madsen, and Katja Nyboe.

For many ideas and starting us down this twisting road of imagination.


Then I found this: http://tfe.thefightingferret.com/heritag...
Based on the Merc 2.1 codebase it seems.

Has this been discussed before? It almost looks from scratch. It doesn't meet the Diku/Merc license, and I suppose this turns into "if the entire code is rewritten, does it still have to follow the license" debate (I would think it should).
01 Mar, 2011, Tyche wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
I never mirrored the versions I have because I thought its provenance was dubious.
01 Mar, 2011, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
'Has this been discussed before? It almost looks from scratch. It doesn't meet the Diku/Merc license, and I suppose this turns into "if the entire code is rewritten, does it still have to follow the license" debate (I would think it should). '
If only a dozen of lines were still there the license would hold. Even in a million lines.
Yes all GPL license kind are cancers :p Avoid them like hell if you want to call your code, well YOUR code.
01 Mar, 2011, Tyche wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
Yes all GPL license kind are cancers :p Avoid them like hell if you want to call your code, well YOUR code.


While this may or may not be true, it is orthogonal to the topic.
02 Mar, 2011, sankoachaea wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
If you say it is based off Merc 2.1, the license sticks.



Har, Tyche incongruously remarking on what is orthogonal to a given topic falls a bit beyond irony.
02 Mar, 2011, Cratylus wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
sankoachaea said:
If you say it is based off Merc 2.1, the license sticks.



Har, Tyche incongruously remarking on what is orthogonal to a given topic falls a bit beyond irony.


stop th h8
02 Mar, 2011, Vigud wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
sankoachaea said:
If you say it is based off Merc 2.1, the license sticks.
So, if I take Merc 2.2 codebase, add a shitload of code to that and plan to release it, do I have to add my own license and copyright notices, relevant to my code? If yes, does my license have to be the same as Merc's one, or could it be MIT license, for example?
02 Mar, 2011, David Haley wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
Do you mind if I ask you a question? Are these questions of yours rhetorical, or are you actually asking serious questions?
02 Mar, 2011, oenone wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
If only a dozen of lines were still there the license would hold. Even in a million lines.


Not necessarily.. If those lines are trivial, they can't hold the license.
02 Mar, 2011, Tyche wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
I also couldn't find any license with TFE.
28 Jul, 2011, Ceafin wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
Zeno, Greyclaw (Alan Button) was the guy who wrote the original and oldest TFE codebase I have up on that site that you referred to. Way back when, when I spoke with him, this was the path he explained to have derived the code from. As far as I know, he and others helping him out only ever talked about a "really bastardized" version of Merc 2.1. This was around 1995 when I joined in on this community. Far later down the road, other coders had mentioned trying to blend in other aspects from completely difference cousin codebases, thus its really spaghetti looking origins.

Honestly, if you want to be safe check out this page of my site: http://tfe.thefightingferret.com/heritag... I try to keep as accurate a list of contributors to the code at each stage of its life as I can.

And here http://tfe.thefightingferret.com/code-ba... You can download the different codebases. (Though I did notice you grabbed the archive at Seltha's site already) In the Help Area you can find the opening splash screen for log-ins. This is where another loose list of contributing names can be located. Along with others possibly not listed yet on my website. (As I haven't fine tooth-combed every file I have gathered just yet.)

If you just wanted to be safe, just stick everyone's name on there. :) Also, if you do make a descendant of the TFE code (and don't choke hold it to your grave) I would love to host a profile page about your mud, point to where people can log on, and even host the source code too! :D
28 Jul, 2011, Scandum wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
I'd like to include this in mudpedia's mud tree, what are the major code released branches in the TFE tree?
08 Sep, 2011, Ceafin wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
Scandum, please visit my site at http://tfe.thefightingferret.com/heritag... to find the most recent layout I have been able to muster for the "The Forest's Edge" and its descendants. I have the lineage from AberMUD and Diku, all the way down to the most recent and currently alive and playable.

I try to keep the information as up-to-date as possible. I'm actually in the process of restoring/updating some of the source codes I archive on the site as well.

Please let me know if you have any TFE information to share, as I would greatly appreciate the support!
08 Sep, 2011, Zeno wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
Zeno, Greyclaw (Alan Button) was the guy who wrote the original and oldest TFE codebase I have up on that site that you referred to. Way back when, when I spoke with him, this was the path he explained to have derived the code from. As far as I know, he and others helping him out only ever talked about a "really bastardized" version of Merc 2.1. This was around 1995 when I joined in on this community. Far later down the road, other coders had mentioned trying to blend in other aspects from completely difference cousin codebases, thus its really spaghetti looking origins.


Honestly I made this topic because if it came from Diku/etc, it seems to be violating the license(s) and wanted to know if this topic had been discussed before.
08 Sep, 2011, Runter wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0
What parts of the license aren't being met?
24 Jan, 2012, jj3666 wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
I know this is an old thread, but I would like to comment on what I know. I contacted Alan, and he did say he used Merc as a reference, and did not modify a Merc download directly, so he released code with no license. Beyond this, I did my own comparison and found ~1600 loc and ~350 vars that were very similar, but comparing that to 100k loc, it is not enough to restrict it under Merc/diku license, ESP w/ the c++ aspect. If that portion ~1% is ever disputed it would not be hard to mod. Also, naming files the same to allow a coder from another base to find their way around does not count at all in copyright terms. I have been working with the code in various forms since GC released it, and feel I know the code better than those casually looking at it.
25 Jan, 2012, KaVir wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
jj3666 said:
I contacted Alan, and he did say he used Merc as a reference, and did not modify a Merc download directly, so he released code with no license.

Whether TFE is a Diku/Merc derivative or not I can't say. But if there's no licence, nobody can legally use it anyway, so the question is rather moot.

jj3666 said:
Beyond this, I did my own comparison and found ~1600 loc and ~350 vars that were very similar, but comparing that to 100k loc, it is not enough to restrict it under Merc/diku license, ESP w/ the c++ aspect.

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-fa...

How much do I have to change in order to claim copyright in someone else's work?
Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, a new version of that work. Accordingly, you cannot claim copyright to another's work, no matter how much you change it, unless you have the owner's consent.
25 Jan, 2012, Vigud wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
What about people outside the US?
25 Jan, 2012, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 19th comment:
Votes: 0
Vigud said:
What about people outside the US?

No license is a problem everywhere, cause it just mean that at some point anybody could have stripped the original license and you would not know. (hard enough to be sure the place you download from did not change the license in itself…as code from BSD was rebranded as GPL as an example (perfectly legal but the BSD folks complained cause it meant they could not use the derivative code in their since it had become GPL).

I have some classes without any license in the code I took over, but considering it is a ROM/Merc derivative, I would just apply the same license anyway, even if it is a quite independant snippet (same data structure used)

And it is about the same when coming to 'inspirational work'
Having same variable name would be easy enough to change ( ch can be called charData or player in a single click..) so I would not consider this alone to prove a 'derivative work', but if the data structure behind those variable are common, you are in for serious problems.
25 Jan, 2012, Tyche wrote in the 20th comment:
Votes: 0
Vigud said:
What about people outside the US?

The issue of whether one needs license to an author's work is pretty much the same in signatory countries of the Berne Convention.
0.0/20