Re: Lua licensing thoughts

[Benjamin Tolputt <btolputt@...>]

David Given wrote:
> Actually, by 'source that made it' I mean the Lua source code that got
> compiled into the bytecode, not the compiler that did the compiling. If
> your Lua source code is GPL'd then you can't distribute the bytecode
> without complying with the GPL. As you say, the license of the compiler
> is *usually* irrelevant.
>   

This is indeed correct, and I apologise if my post caused confusion. It
IS possible for the distribution to have a GPL-licensed engine with the
content (images, models, audio, Lua code, etc) licensed separately. This
is known as an amalgamated release and is perfectly OK according to the
GPL & the Free Software Foundation. There are a number of games already
that use this method of engine/content divide.

-- 
Regards,

Benjamin Tolputt
Analyst Programmer
Mob:   0417 456 505
Email: btolputt@bigpond.net.au

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential to the
intended recipient and may be privileged. If you have received this
email inadvertently or you are not the intended recipient, you may not
disseminate, distribute, copy or in any way rely on it. Further, you
should notify the sender immediately and delete the email from your
computer. Whilst we have taken precautions to alert us to the presence
of computer viruses, we cannot guarantee that this email and any files
transmitted with it are free from such viruses.