Difference between revisions of "Talk:RWPCL"

From Robowiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(my brain is copyright-free)
(agreed)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
: Um, no.  You can't copyright ideas or concepts, only fixed implementations.  If I copy a RWCPL snippet of code -- even if I make major changes -- and use it in a closed-source bot, then that's bad.  But if I'm a beginning robocoder and learn how to do a for loop in Java, or how HOT works, or even more advanced concepts after reading RWCPL code, then I'm free to apply that knowledge to any aspect of my life and the RWCPL doesn't get to tag along.  --[[User:Darkcanuck|Darkcanuck]] 15:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 
: Um, no.  You can't copyright ideas or concepts, only fixed implementations.  If I copy a RWCPL snippet of code -- even if I make major changes -- and use it in a closed-source bot, then that's bad.  But if I'm a beginning robocoder and learn how to do a for loop in Java, or how HOT works, or even more advanced concepts after reading RWCPL code, then I'm free to apply that knowledge to any aspect of my life and the RWCPL doesn't get to tag along.  --[[User:Darkcanuck|Darkcanuck]] 15:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 +
 +
:: Agreed, however the existing [[RWCPL]] page says 'concepts' which is a bad thing. Note though, with copyright there is a fuzzy line where copying out code from memory can be a violation but writing code based upon concepts remembered is not a violation. In some cases where the number of ways to implement a concept is limited then the issue gets even fuzzier really. Regardless of that fuzzy area though, indeed concepts can't be copyrighted. --[[User:Rednaxela|Rednaxela]] 15:15, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:15, 20 August 2009

Is it, by this license, I'm not able to derive code from any robots under this license and use it in my robot where all my other code are either close-sourced or under the different license (such as NPRL)? I know that you guys are not lawyers, but please answer. » Nat | Talk » 14:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Right. If you use code from a RWPCL bot, your new robot's full source code must be open source under the RWPCL. This would apply to not just source code, but also to ideas or concepts that you learn from studying a RWPCL bot's code. The latter is a little bit fuzzier, as it's harder to prove, and many of those ideas/concepts can be found in non-RWPCL places, as well. This is generally called a Copyleft type of license, like the GPL. --Voidious 14:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Um, no. You can't copyright ideas or concepts, only fixed implementations. If I copy a RWCPL snippet of code -- even if I make major changes -- and use it in a closed-source bot, then that's bad. But if I'm a beginning robocoder and learn how to do a for loop in Java, or how HOT works, or even more advanced concepts after reading RWCPL code, then I'm free to apply that knowledge to any aspect of my life and the RWCPL doesn't get to tag along. --Darkcanuck 15:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Agreed, however the existing RWCPL page says 'concepts' which is a bad thing. Note though, with copyright there is a fuzzy line where copying out code from memory can be a violation but writing code based upon concepts remembered is not a violation. In some cases where the number of ways to implement a concept is limited then the issue gets even fuzzier really. Regardless of that fuzzy area though, indeed concepts can't be copyrighted. --Rednaxela 15:15, 20 August 2009 (UTC)