This is sad, very sad. A developer from The Libretro Team has written up a blog post on the libretro site asking for us and others to highlight an ongoing problem of code getting ripped off and licenses completely ignored. To be clear, it's not just them, there's other examples in that post of other projects also getting the same crappy treatment.
For those who have no idea what The Libretro Team do, they work on Libretro: a simple API that allows for the creation of games and emulators, RetroArch: a frontend for emulators, game engines and media players and Lakka: a light Linux distribution that can turn a computer into a retro-gaming console.
The blog post starts with a rather sad introduction:
Dear game journalists and other members of the press,
We are beyond the point of desperation at this point, and we ask you dearly for your help in this ongoing problem. Independent entrepreneurs are playing loose and fast with the laws and licenses surrounding open source code, and we have found ourselves the victim of multiple copyright and license violations ever since Hyperkin started selling its Retron5 product back in 2014.
It doesn't get any prettier the further you read it either. It's rather a lot to take in, but the jist of it is that multiple people and companies keep ripping off the emulation scene. They take the emulators, bundle it with some cheap hardware and sell it hoping to make a quick buck. The problem stretches over a few years, but it seems to have increased since Nintendo released things like the NES and SNES mini. Naturally, others see such things being popular and think "We can do it too!" and they see money signs in their eyes and think of the massive yacht they can buy with the quick cash.
They've had some success in fighting these, with Amazon taking down the Sen Pi device made by TekSyndicate that used the Lakka distribution, but more problems remain and they have been rather demoralised by the mess of it all. Especially as this year Retro-Bit have now made the "Super Retro Cade" which uses RetroArch. The company has admitted to using it, but the company doesn't even seem sure what emulators it's using.
Side note: I hadn't actually heard of Lakka until today, sounds like an awesome project!
I really feel for them, I can't imagine how crap it feels to have people rip off your code and sell it on without giving back in some way. Of course, not everyone wants something in return for people using their code, but if the license forbids it or instructs you to provide the code with the hardware (or whatever else the license says you need to do), then you should play ball.
Hopefully with us and others highlighting it, some people might think twice before ripping off open source/non-commercial projects. If you do, you will be found out and you will have to pay for it in the end. The problem on top of all this, is that it will put off the very people working on such projects from continuing and if your business relies on their work—good luck doing it yourself.
If, like me, this kind of stuff annoys you, please do spread the word.
All the best to The Libretro Team and anyone else being affected by stuff like this.
Thanks for the tip Brandon.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Quoting: TheSHEEEPQuoting: EikeThat's not true, open source licences are enforced.Please, don't be naive.
No problem, haven't been for decades.
Quoting: TheSHEEEPThese may have a certain reach in the Americas and Europe, but besides that?
Some minor (or even major) business in Asia can do mostly whatever they want. Nothing there to keep them in check - or those who could do not really care.
You can still block two of the biggest world markets. What Cineese can do in China, we all can see from Windows usage and sells...
Kuduzkehpan Dec 21, 2017
1) what is nature of GPL and FOSS
2) what is copyleft and copyright
3) why open-source if there are commerical targets?
Last edited by Kuduzkehpan on 21 December 2017 at 3:28 pm UTC
Quoting: elmapul"The problem on top of all this, is that it will put off the very people working on such projects from continuing and if your business relies on their work—good luck doing it yourself."
except that they can hire someone with the money they did with the rip offs..
also, its a bit ironic that most of the users of the emulators are pirates, and people are "pirating" their code...
Those users could share some of their plunders. :p
By the way, most of the community behind modifying content for old systems don't "pirate" at all, but publish patches, which require an unmodified ROM to work. Also, they are fans of the companies that used to make these old games, so for the ones that are still around these fans probably generate more profit than the average Joe.
On one hand they say stuff like: This is final and not subject to change. Bribes are not going to work, donations are not going to work, pledges are not going to work.
And then they comment on the same post with: As long as our software's license and terms are being respected, we are willing to ally and collaborate with people, including the party involved (if they intend on doing things by the book the second time around). But we cannot let wilfull violations of Lakka's license go unanswered. We are forced to act then.
It seems like they're building a great piece of software that people want to use, and then prevent people from shipping it with their hardware. It's as if Google started suing companies for building Android smartphones and required everyone to flash the device when they bought it.
Again, I do understand that they're pissed about people abusing their license. But they're apparently not being specially approachable about the issue either.
slaapliedje Dec 21, 2017
Quoting: GuestQuoting: slaapliedjeI was always curious about this. Let's say something like retroArch is turned into using FPGA cores. Is that still using software? Or is that written out to the hardware, effectively making it not under any license?
As with everything else, the creator chooses the license under which to release their creation. If they borrow from other projects, then they must abide by those projects licences. But if they come up with something completely their own, they are free to do with it as they please.
'Software' for an FPGA is typically written in some hardware description language (HDL), typically Verilog or the like. To come up with the design, the author would typically analyze the circuitry of the device and write code to simulate it. They likely wouldn't borrow from other emulators, since most emulators 'emulate' at a higher level than raw circuit components (for reasons of speed, lack of domain knowledge, etc).
However, if someone releases a hardware core and stipulates that it cannot be used commercially, then technically one couldn't just convert this to software and make the license disappear. The work would be a derived work, and could still be affected by the licencing of the original product.
It's all a fine line, really. There's an axiom in Computer Science that says hardware and software are essentially the same. Hardware is software committed to silicon, and software is virtualized hardware.
For example, there is a developer I know that is creating an FPGA core for the 2600. They have chosen not to release their 'source code' (HDL) so far, but they did want to help with Stella. So they converted the sound hardware circuitry simulation code to 'C', and allowed Stella to use that. I must say that this was greatly appreciated, since it will improve the sound code in Stella to surpass all current emulators. The point being, the HDL stayed closed, but the creator was still able to create and open-source block of code and release it freely.
That is pretty much what I figured, I was more curious about how one would disciver if their VHDL was taken, since with software there are always ways to poke arround the binaries and see if it is using a particular emulator. I would thing FPGA would be harder to tell once the code was written to the gate arrays.
By the way, IS there anither 2600 emulator? I mean that is worth using outside of Stella. I mean Stella is like the cream of the crop, is properly multiplatform, and simply awesome. Thank you for working on it, from all of us nerds! I wish Altirra (for the Atari 8bits) was multiplatform instead of having to run it in wine, since it currently is the best in it's league.
slaapliedje Dec 21, 2017
Quoting: TheRiddickI think TekSyndicate now sell the device without any software and just point to links on their forum on howto install it. Yeah they stuffed up by installing it for people who bought the device first time around, not sure if they mentioned that stuff up or not (on YT).
Curious, what about a bootstrap? So let's say I want to sell a device that uses libretro. Upon first boot up it connects to the internet, shows the libretro license page and then once agreed to, it downloads and installs all the bits?
I would thonk that would be the best way to do it, right? (If I were a company making such a decive.) Also.. assholes should contribute code so the devices all get better.
Quoting: CSharpI respect and support Lakka / Libretro. But, I am uncertain what they're trying to achieve here. And I'm not 100% sure if they know themselves.All I'm seeing is them demanding their license agreement be respected if someone intends to ship hardware using that piece of software. Just because a piece of software has been licensed in a way that makes it difficult for you to ship a product with it doesn't mean you get to circumvent the license, it means you need to either work harder to comply with the license or find another piece of software that does the same thing without the license burden.
On one hand they say stuff like: This is final and not subject to change. Bribes are not going to work, donations are not going to work, pledges are not going to work.
And then they comment on the same post with: As long as our software's license and terms are being respected, we are willing to ally and collaborate with people, including the party involved (if they intend on doing things by the book the second time around). But we cannot let wilfull violations of Lakka's license go unanswered. We are forced to act then.
It seems like they're building a great piece of software that people want to use, and then prevent people from shipping it with their hardware. It's as if Google started suing companies for building Android smartphones and required everyone to flash the device when they bought it.
Again, I do understand that they're pissed about people abusing their license. But they're apparently not being specially approachable about the issue either.
ElectricPrism Dec 21, 2017
Retro wants the companies to contribute code back to the base and keep their logo and name on it?
If so, that sounds reasonable to me.
--
This is a weird read, I am unsure what "selling" the author is referring to.
Many companies sell hardware bundled with free software. Is he implying they are literally selling the emulators at a extra cost beyond the hardware?
Last edited by ElectricPrism on 21 December 2017 at 6:56 pm UTC
Quoting: ElectricPrismIs he implying they are literally selling the emulators at a extra cost beyond the hardware?AFAIK, some of the libretro cores are ports from emulators that simply cannot be sold, due license. So these shouldn't be shipped with any paid hardware ever.
Doc Angelo Dec 21, 2017
Quoting: TheSHEEEPNo, morals are a terrible base for any kind dealing between people. Everyone has their own morals and acts according to them, of course. But they have no place in law or its enforcement.
If your whole argument is "don't do something because I think it is wrong", you have already lost your cause.
As long as their is no tangible downside to people using code without adhering to licenses, people will just continue to do so. And to be honest, I don't really see a way to create something tangible.
I agree that the world right now doesn't give a shit about such things. But that doesn't have to be this way. Despite FOSS having this disadvantage, it still is way better in comparison to closed source. Technically and morally.
Ideally, people don't have to "deal" with each other in the future, but rather contribute for the sake of making something better for everyone - including themselves.
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me