Bukkit Opened Sourced?

Discussion in 'Bukkit Discussion' started by augesrob, Sep 15, 2014.


Does this make sense?

Poll closed Sep 22, 2014.
  1. yes

    0 vote(s)
  2. no

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Offline


    About Bukkit


    In the bottom right hand corner?
    If this is the case how can there be any legal problems if someone recodes bukkit?


    EDIT by Moderator: merged posts, please use the edit button instead of double posting.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2016
  2. Offline


    Recoding isn't the problem. Using Wesley Wolfe (Wolvereness)' code is.
  3. To my understaning the problem is distributing the Bukkit API (containing his code) with a non-GPL-conform THING would be the actual problem, concerning this very DMCA.

    Might be that i am wrong, but that seems to be the reasoning at this stage, however i assume there are some follow-up possibilities disregarding Bukkit being used, in case you try to work around in a too simple way.

    If it was as simple as "just don'T distribute the Bukkit API with CB, instead let people place that in the server directory alongside CB", it would indicate that people want it dead, though, because that's just too simple to do. So my assumption expands to that the first paragraph is not the only problem.

    Since it wasn't mentioned yet: Open source doesn't mean anything else than that you can view the source code - a good start for trust, but the next thing to consider will be, what the licensing is. In this case you have the Bukkit API and the CraftBukkit server mod (and the Bukkit project), don't mix them up! The DMCA evolves around CraftBukkit being distributed with the Bukkit API inside, at the same time as containing decompiled code of Mojangs server jar file, which is claimed to be not open source and thus violating the GPL license.

    The CraftBukkit code (and jar) seem to be "dual licensed" as GPL and LGPL. I am not sure if it can be contested without regarding it including the Bukkit API for distribution, using the API might not be the problem. I am no lawyer, still i have not seen anyone claiming to be specialized on copyright writing that this is a straight-forward case (no proof that it's not!).

    EDIT by Moderator: merged posts, please use the edit button instead of double posting.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2016
  4. Offline


    Open source means more than that. It indicates that you can view the source, make changes to it and share those changes with others. As you said, there's a license in every open source project that spells out these rights exactly.
  5. I am not sure if you are allowed to alter any "open source" content and use privately, no matter what the license is. As soon as you share your altered work with others, it might be a problem, because that might count as distribution of altered/derived works, so licenses and laws may apply. That also depends strongly on what you mean by "share". As you can see the CraftBukkit "open source" content has been taken down by a DMCA in some parts of the world :p, though that's not what i was aiming at. I was refering to commercial products that are put "open source", but don't necessarily grant you the rights to alter and share, two examples:
    - Games, offered open source for modding only.
    - Security libraries, put open source to increase trust.
  6. Offline


    You can always make changes to an open source project and use them privately. The GPL FAQ explains why here:


    What I mean is publicly release the original source code or a modified version. Once you do that you must follow the license, because it is the only thing giving you the right to redistribute the software and derivative versions.
  7. I was having the general case in mind, refering to open source in terms of "source code made public", not the GPL in particular.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page