Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: source and license of ShaderEffect example

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default source and license of ShaderEffect example

    ClanLib-3.0/Examples/Display_Shaders/ShaderEffect is pretty spiffy, in that it gives a simple example of procedural content generation. This is the sort of approach I imagine doing in my game; that is, writing a lot of GLSL 3.30 code. I noticed however that the concept of this example is not original. ClanLib-3.0/Examples/Display_Shaders/ShaderEffect/Resources/fragment_shader.glsl attributes it as:
    // Shader code by Frequency (http://www.frequency.fr/)
    I went to that site and found the original work, "To the Road of Ribbon". It has source code, but it's not GLSL source code as it appears in ClanLib.

    rombust, did you obtain a GLSL 3.30 version of this demo from somewhere? If so, I'd like to know where, so that I can find more of the same. Or, did you look at the "To the Road of Ribbon" .asm source, extract the GLSL code that's embedded there, and bump it to #version 330? Or did you do something else?

    What was the license on the original code? Both for purposes of programming, and for attribution? There is no license in the sources at the Frequency website. I think such things fall into a legal grey area and aren't "public domain." That is to say, it can make ClanLib and users of this example legally exposed, if the original author up and decides to make a fuss about it. Or authors: "Frequency" is not a person, but a group, whose members change over time. The .nfo file attributes various people; legally speaking all of them are Joint Authors. That means any of them could say, "Hey, pay us money."

    I think it would be appropriate to name the work itself, "To the Road of Ribbon," and also briefly state that this example is a derivative work. Unless you feel that's not appropriate and have made a new work... in which case, you shouldn't be attributing Frequency as having written the shader code. I think an IP lawyer would say this is a derivative work though, as it looks and behaves just like the original. You might consider putting the original .nfo in ClanLib and then a README saying how you derived the work.
    Last edited by bvanevery; 04-05-2013 at 02:01 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. FQ Server License
    By Gamecouncil in forum Funeral Quest
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-22-2008, 01:44 PM
  2. License Server Down?
    By Stainless in forum Funeral Quest
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-19-2005, 06:28 AM
  3. Why pay THAT MUCH for a license?
    By Hugna in forum Funeral Quest
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-09-2005, 07:21 PM
  4. big license
    By Akolade in forum RTsoft Tavern
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-26-2003, 07:35 AM
  5. Dink Smallwood Source License
    By Seth in forum Game development
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-16-2003, 03:47 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •