I''m no lawyer, but that is how I understand it. Now there is a difference between GPL and LGPL. Supposedly you can use LGPL as a DLL and not give up rights to your main program, but its unclear enough to me that I stay away from GPL and LGPL stuff.

Jack

You CAN sell it, but you have to provide the source code.

You can sell it, but anyone with a copy can redistrubute it to whomever they like however they like without paying anything extra back to you.

So you''ll sell at least one, but that first customer would be within his rights to put your game up for free download afterword.

Customer would be within his rights to post the source code for free download. The data files that make up the game are a different story.

The person who buys that first copy has the freedom to do what he want''s with the game, as long as he gives others the same rights. So he could give away binaries of the game, but he would have to deliver source code on request, and that person would get the source code from you. You can still sell you game, but others have the same rights as you. If I understand the GPL correctly, you can charge people for the source code as long as the price doesn''t exceed the binary. So if you sell the game for $29.99, and someone requests the source code, you could ask for $29.99 for it, but onece they have the source code, they can change it, or not changeit, and compile new binaries, give them away, or if your game is obscure, they could take it and sell it for more in a larger market for say $39.99 instead of your $29.99, but he would have to give his customers the same rights you gave him.

If he added some neat new features you want in your game, you can add them back to yours. This is one of the good points of GPL licensed software, and other Free/Open Source Software. Since the code stays open, and everybody has the same freedom and rights, the improvements get passed around to everybody, and in the end can produce better software. Most people belive you can''t sell Free Software, but you can, and companies like Red Hat have done well doing so for years. Even though you can download Red Hat Linux for free, many people buy it because they don''t want to spend a lot of time downloading it, or they want the physical media and a manual and a box, or they may want support for their game, which comes with the box set you buy.

ive always wondered what happens to GPLd software once traditional copyright expires, i know its a long time 70yrs or something, but from that point technically anyone could make it closed sourced without having to distribute source from that point on. am i right?

no you cant charge for the source code beyond the cost for the media and shiping.

if you use GPL code, then basically consider the stuff yoru selling the artwork and other game content. the binaries can be sold with the content, but you must provide the source code to whoever gets the binaries. i HIGHLY suggest staying away from GPL code if you want any control over your game and who gets it.

AP, true, but being how GPL works as long as new ppl add code, or the code keeps getting updated the copyright will never run out. copyright dies 70yrs AFTER the copyright holder dies. chances of that happening on a worthwhile GPL project? not very large since ppl will always be working on it.

basically anyone who gets a binary has legal right to the full and complete source code for FREE. so you have to send it to them in a timly manner. this is why all GPL apps tend to come in source code form and why its sometimes hard to find them precompiled.

again, you CANT charge for the source code. the only way you could is if the code was 100% yours and not under GPL.

DONT use a GPL engine if you plan on selling or want to keep the code confidential. you would be surprised how fast the open source community would create there own content and make purchasing your content a waste of money (unless you have great artists and writers).

brandon6684, please delete or modify your post. its VERY inaccurate. you cant charge for someone elses work. you cant charge for the source code and teh copyright extends only to the content not the actual binary nor source code that makes the binary.

CheeseGrater you should change your post as well. while its true that stupid open source maniacs will resort to pirating the game, they are not allowed to legally distribute anything beyond the source code and binary. all artwork, sound, data files, levels, readmes, etc are all under copyright by those who created it and thus cant be distributed by anyone. GPL specifically deals with binaries and source code ONLY. it gives NO rights to anything else.

Anonymous,

In theory you''re right. After the copyright expires, GPL programs become public domain just like anything else. But considering how long copyright lasts these days its pretty meaningless. How much software will be useful nearly a century from now? Absolutely none.

i know that my question was largly hypothetical and unlikely to ever happen(unless the copyright expiration date changes).

But here how i see it.. the original creator of the software owns the copyright to it, otherwise the GPL license could never be enforced, as people could do whatever they wanted with it(make it proprietary), he then allows others to use and modify the source code aslong as they follow the rules he sets.. the key point is that legally he will allways be the sole copyright holder, nomatter who contributes code after that they will have no copyright claims(am i right with this?)... can that person legally reverse the GPL and make it proprietary? i guess they couldnt stop others using the software under the GPL conditions, but he would be legally able to produce his own proprietary software?(cause he still owns the copyright)