Hi, guys.
I have a doubt (I’m not a lawyer, by the way 
) about licensing my game.
I don’t know if I can use GPL assets in a non GPL code or if I can use them if I share the code (I have no problems with that).
Any of you have the answer?
You’d have to release everything under GPL.
1 Like
When you refer to “assets” are you referring to code (libraries) or to artistic content? Also, license questions are quite subtle and hard to answer generally. Usually, of you link GPL code to yours you must distribute the entire work under the GPL (and provide sources), but things change a bit if you’re using the LGPL or the GPL + class path exception.
Thanks for your replies, guys
I’m talking about artistic content (models, textures, scenes…); but if the solution is to share the code, I have absolutely no problem with that. I was worried about a legal headache.
It’s extremely odd that someone would license art under the GPL, which is a license entirely dedicated and designed for code. I’m not sure what your obligations are in this case, but since art does not “link” to your code your code may not be restricted to being released under GPL-compatible terms. However, do not take my word on that. Probably your best course of action is to contact the original author, find out what they intended by licensing under the GPL, and following their intent (or finding other assets).
2 Likes
I tried, but he didn’t answer so I asked in the forum.
Anyway, I’ll share the code therefore problem solved.
about artistic content stick with cc-0 or cc-by(where you need just mention author)
about code, stick with new bsd (bsd-3) or any other good license. even bsd-4 or bsd-2 are not perfect. bsd-3 is perfect
gpl is like disease.
1 Like
It doesn’t matter if the licensed work is code or assets or binaries.
GPL extends to every creative work that is presented as a combined product with something else under GPL.
So GPL extends on your software if it is released with or requires gpl assets to work.
But it doesn’t extend on content generated or imported by the user using the gpl software as long as it is standalone and not reliant on internal apis.
For example, GPL doesn’t extend on models made with blender but extends on blender addons that use the bpy api.
GPL doesn’t extend also on software that is standalone and accessed using a common protocol, eg. a reverse proxy accessing a GPL server doesn’t need to be released under GPL, or a software calling gcc using CLI doesn’t need to be released under GPL.
This is my understanding of the license.
Truer words were never spoken. Some proprietary licenses are more liberal than GPL.
4 Likes