Is it ok to distribute source to other Torque owners?

#1 The only thing you cannot distribute is the engine source (C++) code. Everything else is fine: scripts (.cs), art, audio files. Distribution of the C++ engine code to non-SDK owners is a violation of the EULA and promotes piracy.

#2 Hey Lee..

Don't resources on this site do just that?

#3 Resources on this site provide snippets of code changes, and not the entire source solution.

#4 To other TGE licensees, yes. You can give your whole tree to me, for example. Unless, of course, you are using other licensed software that I do not have a license to (for example, Havok).

#5 I agree with David, as long as they are TGE owners i dont see why not. Though im not sure regarding TGEA and TGE as apparently there isa 110 dollar difference in the additions , thus it being a different version of the engine. My concern is that theSDK can easily be downloaded from varies torrents, sohaving access to source isnt really a fight to get source if a person wanted to be stupid. I personally has orginally though the .cs was source but was informed it was not. which makes it alot easier in the long run.

#6 I'll further elaborate on what David said:

Owners of the same SDK can share code with each other, however some Torque products have their own SDK and EULA. The following is a list:

• TGE[li]TGEA[li]TGB[li]AFX[li]etc.

Get the point? So if I have TGE and AFX, and my friend has TGE, I can only share TGE related source code under the terms of EULA and AFX licensing.

#7 Yup. Michael much more clearly and concisely, and with better examples, said what I meant.

#8 Thanks for the feedback. I'd love to hear from an employee on this.

#9 Why an employee? Here are the EULAs stating what you can do with the Indie license of the products:

TGE Indie EULA
TGB Indie EULA
TGEA Indie EULA
AFX EULA

#10 If project source could not be shared among licensees, then there would be no teams; only lone-wolf projects as the members of the project would not be legally allowed access to the source code. They would have to attempt to implement features that someone else on the team already implemented, hoping that the solutions match close enough to get the project done between the two (or three or ten) implementations.

Which would not make much sense unless GG was single-handedly attempting to destroy the concept of development teams.

Quote:Licensee may not distribute the source code or documentation to the engine in any manner, unless recipient also has a license to the Engine.

You should always read the EULA before purchasing a product.

#11 *Edited*- Misread David's post. Valid point made.

#12 .

#13 Berserk: you are rather hitting on my point. That's why I'd like an official response, perhaps with an explanation of the approved way of sharing my whole tree.

I'm basically wanting to post all my source and scripts, so that if I am fabulously lucky enough for someone to take an interest and want to try their hand at doing something, they can do so.

#14 @Michael
You should read it a bit more carefully. I was stating that if project source could not be shared among licensees, then there would be no possible way for a team to work with the same source code. The vast majority of teams here are a combination and this is possible because licensees can share the source code with other licensees.

@Lee
One of the ways that this has been done in the past is to create a topic on the private forum for the package and have the person post in that topic to prove ownership. That was the way the MMOKit proved ownership so that it could be distributed to other licensees.

#15 David: That seems reasonable, but does still leave the potential problem of, say, a 1.3 licensee getting ahold of my 1.5 code.

#16 Yes it does, but that's currently the only "system" that is in-place other than contacting GG directly to find out if someone has a legitimate license. It would be nice if the licenses were listed in the profile.

#17 .

#18 Owned licenses in the profile is the best solution I've heard.

Asking GG for information on a member is horrid. Hell, I sent them an email asking for an upgrade quote a month ago and they still haven't answered. And I'm waving (a little bit of) money in their face.

#19 .