The general consensus seems to be this:
- Publishing a GPL addon without an Orbiter exception is probably a violation, unless there's an implied exception.
- Only copyright holders can take down the addon. As long as no other GPL software is used, this is the addon developers
At 1 I agree. I always thought that the fact that they are Orbiter addons already implies that, but as it seems, people see it stricter.
For 2, I think practically everybody can take it down. Just change a line and redistribute it (which you are allowed to do), and you are a copyright holder. If Lisias' and jarmonik's opinion (I still think it is just that) is the consensus here, this would mean everybody can complain about the addon violating copyright, and therefore put pressure on O-F and/or OHM crew to put it down.
- Is it even legit to publish GPL w/ exception code, derived from some other GPL code? Does the Orbiter exception make the GPL w/ exception non-compatible with vanilla GPL?
As the FSF itself states that an exception would solve that legal problem (which it also itself stipulated!), I'd say it does not make it non-compatible. You can only change the license of a project if all copyright owners agree, though. See the OVP license change thread for details.
What are we even arguing about? Multistage? Face, I assume you put an Orbiter exception in, is the issue some addon that uses some vanilla GPL code?
Not only Multistage, all addons with GPL in general. If this stays as unclear as it is to me, I'll just throw in the towel and stop Orbiter development all together. Releasing closed source does not make sense to me, and those "take all and give nothing back" licenses do neither. Plus I also realized that the mentality in the community is strongly biased towards closed source, and that I find rather saddening. Just my opinion, of course.
Sure I can gather Artlav and Donamy together to get the permission to change the license for genericvessel, and get WHAP for permission to change the license for AU, and all of the contributers for OMP. And I'm certain they will understand and agree.
But where will this stop? Next time a GPL hater shows up, another "loophole" will be found, forcing me to do the dance again? Nah, don't have time for that.
I don't get it. If listed on O-H, then the addon developer can already take it down at any time for any reason, regardless of licensing (assuming that the uploader is the developer). If other GPL software is involved, wouldn't it be quite against the spirit of the GPL for them to throw a hissy to force the add-on to be removed?
GPL isn't just about hosting. Once a GPL software is released, the genie is out of the bottle. But the consensus seems to be that modifying and re-distributing a GPL'ed addon for Orbiter is "illegal" to a point of causing troubles for the hoster.
You may call it throwing a hissy, but I for one have taken down my GPL'ed repos already. I don't need a discussion with BB or OHM admins, just because some license troll might find it funny to bitch. Not that I think anyone here is such a creature, mind you. The internet is just full of s. And this thread here is sure giving some nice ideas .
This of course doesn't mean that nobody can pick up the torch. The whole source is always inside the repos/copies (well, at least in the projects I've started), and everybody with a copy can build upon it. After this discussion here, I just doubt that anybody will risk it.
---------- Post added at 10:05 ---------- Previous post was at 09:51 ----------
I think the original argument was Face lamenting about the restrictive multistage 2015 license, and then people started lawyering :lol:
Indeed. The first multistage2015 license restricted distribution to a point where the whole idea of doing a community replacement of the abandoned vinka tool was reduced to absurdity. Not being familiar with open source in general, fred18 asked what he could use to see his requirements fulfilled.
I suggested GPL, fred18 made it GPLv3, and BOOM :lol:.