[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Libre Gaming Manifesto

From: Ian Kelling
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Libre Gaming Manifesto
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 22:56:43 -0700
User-agent: mu4e 0.9.19; emacs 26.0.50

Lyberta <> writes:

> Ian Kelling:
>> An ethically operated game seems like a better term to
>> me. A libre game sounds
>> more like one with free software and free creative works. I think the
>> general idea is a good one, along the lines of
>>, but this current
>> implementation has a lot of flaws and things it's missing.
> Ok, I will probably rename the document.
>> The ideas about a master server seem a bit reaching and poorly defined
>> to me. "it should not discriminate against modded servers." What if a
>> modded server name has profanity or hate speech in it's name, or is
>> objectionable in any vast different kind of ways? The master server
>> should display it? No. If there is a master server, people should simply
>> be able to run their own master servers, and a web search should be able
>> to find them if the most prominent master server operator does not
>> display the things people want.
> Well, I grew up with Valve games and those allowed all kinds of mods on
> their master servers. I know that it would be hard to define clear
> criteria of what should be allowed and what shouldn't.

Thinking about it again, perhaps it's ok to not have absolute clarity,
something like: "a master server may have policies which specifically
restrict listing of modified servers, but they must be in the same
spirit as policies which restrict unmodified servers. For example, if
there is a policy to disallow hate speech in the name of an unmodified
server, that could also extend disallow a modification of a server to
embed hate speech in the modifications, such as graphics etc. And for
example, a master server must not have some significantly longer
approval process for a modified server compared to an unmodified one.

> I've noticed that some games (such as Red Eclipse) are distributed under
> a free license but do not allow mods on their master servers. I find it
> extremely annoying because it is almost impossible to promote your own
> master server because not much people play these games.
>> "Modding" is not a term many people understand.
> Will change to a better term.
>> "All games" and "Multiplayer games" should be in a bigger font to show
>> they are higher level section delimiters, it's confusing otherwise.
> Done.
>> The last points about how to handle proprietary code and content seem
>> contradictory to earlier points that all code and content should be free.
> Well some server admins add proprietary content to their servers and it
> happens a lot. This situation is the same as with JavaScript.

I understand the tendency, but I think there should be a policy that the
game is libre, and if the master server shows modified servers, they
should be libre too. Servers which don't follow the policy should be
reported to the master server operator and result in removing the
listing of the violating server if they do not come in to compliance in
a relatively short amount of time. Of course, players should still be
able to play there if they input the server address manually or use a
different master server. Delisting servers is already going to be needed
anyways: copyright applies to modified servers, and some server admins
will probably violate copyleft on the game's code/art (if it uses
copyleft). The legal system can stop those servers from being operated,
but the master server won't want to list those servers. By the same
method, it should not list servers which have added non-free
code/content that is not a violation of copyright, but does not give
it's users freedom.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]