Doom 1 and 2 are now officially licensed under the...

All posts Simon Müller :sparkles_trans:'s posts Post Back to profile

Simon Müller :sparkles_trans:

Doom 1 and 2 are now officially licensed under the #GPL, no longer dual-licensed with the DSL :)

https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM/

https://nitter.woodland.cafe/doom_txt/status/1747398603209883882

#FOSS #OpenSource #Games #Gaming #GameNews

Like 17 January at 11:51 | Open on mstdn.social

27 comments

Captain Steph 🇨🇦

@Rush with the assets?

17 January at 12:25 | Open on fosstodon.org

Captain Steph 🇨🇦

@Rush No assets, builds on linux only. The readme is quite fun to read!

17 January at 12:26 | Open on fosstodon.org

Simon Müller :sparkles_trans:

@sirber No, this is the *code*

although most projects don't license their assets under GPL and alike

17 January at 12:32 | Open on mstdn.social

Frost「:therian:｜霜の狼｜人面獣心」🐺❄️

@Rush Wait, they weren't before?

...oh, was it just the engine before?

17 January at 14:00 | Open on masto.brightfur.net

Simon Müller :sparkles_trans:

@IceWolf they had a custom license before from what I can read on the doomwiki, and source wasn't available officially outside of community archive projects either (?)

I didn't read super deep into it, a friend just told me about it :)

https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_Source_License

17 January at 14:08 | Open on mstdn.social

Florian Wilhelm

@Rush @IceWolf Wow I would have bet a decent amount that it was GPL for over a decade.. Maybe confused with Quake or RTCW?

17 January at 17:51 | Open on social.tchncs.de

Simon Müller :sparkles_trans:

@fwilhe @IceWolf from what was said, it wasn't unambiguous and in that sense official until now :)

https://tech.lgbt/@0x10f/111772052016882586

17 January at 17:55 | Open on mstdn.social

0x10f

@Rush According to this page, the Doom source has been ambiguously under GPL since 1999 (but it was indeed made unambiguous yesterday).
https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_source_code

17 January at 15:42 | Open on tech.lgbt

Jonathan Dowland

@0x10f @Rush I have fond memories of that moment

17 January at 21:58 | Open on pleroma.debian.social

manusaurio

@0x10f @Rush afaik the older license (which can still be read in the commit history) did not allow commercial use:

«Prohibited Uses: Under no circumstances shall you, the end-user, be permitted, allowed or authorized to commercially exploit the Software [...]»

It was open source (as in "I can see and modify the code") but not GPL.

What's interesting is that GPL does allow commercial use, but they didn't edit Carmack's first paragraph in the README file, which described the old license:

«Here it is, at long last. The DOOM source code is released for your non-profit use [...]»

So now the README is lying!

@0x10f @Rush afaik the older license (which can still be read in the commit history) did not allow commercial use:

«Prohibited Uses: Under no circumstances shall you, the end-user, be permitted, allowed or authorized to commercially exploit the Software [...]»

It was open source (as in "I can see and modify the code") but not GPL.

Expand text...

18 January at 4:38 | Open on masto.es

Buzz Bzzz bzz BZZZ The 18th

@Rush WOOOOOO

17 January at 21:22 | Open on mastodon.social

Vincent392

@Rush and Quake III?
https://github.com/id-Software/Quake-III-Arena

17 January at 21:44 | Open on mastodon.social

Arby

@Rush Uff... I still have the original Doom 2 CD here.

17 January at 23:20 | Open on ruhr.social

Simon Müller :sparkles_trans:

@arby get compiling 👀

18 January at 7:11 | Open on mstdn.social

Yaroslav Khnygin

@Rush I wonder if Rage / idTech 5 will ever be open-sourced.

18 January at 1:35 | Open on mastodon.ie

Andrew Hoyer

@Rush Can anyone explain the apparent contradiction with the GPL-2.0 license and the text in the README that says "The DOOM source code is released for your non-profit use."

18 January at 3:24 | Open on indieweb.social

Simon Müller :sparkles_trans:

@andrewhoyer that's from before the exclusive GPL licensing, from the original release under the DOOM Source License

18 January at 7:10 | Open on mstdn.social

Stuart Longland (VK4MSL)

@Rush Must admit, I've got quite a bit of respect for ID Software regarding their game releases.

Release the game commercially, make some money off of it… but then make the source code available once they've made their cash.

That policy has meant their game spread virally across so many platforms. I played DOOM more on Linux than I ever did on DOS.

It also spawned spin-off independent games using the same engine.

I guess they could make a digital-download release of the game files needed to play the full game for a small fee, for those who missed out on buying original media.

They didn't have to pick GPLv2, there were lots of choices… but I respect their choice. I wish more publishers did this.

@Rush Must admit, I've got quite a bit of respect for ID Software regarding their game releases.

Release the game commercially, make some money off of it… but then make the source code available once they've made their cash.

That policy has meant their game spread virally across so many platforms. I played DOOM more on Linux than I ever did on DOS.

Expand text...

18 January at 4:44 | Open on mastodon.longlandclan.id.au

:mima_rule: Mima-sama

@Rush@mstdn.social Wait, I thought it's always been licensed under the #GPL since the 90s? I mean there's a reason #Doom has been available in #Debian for a long time... (Though only the engine, not the assets which are proprietary) :sagume_think: