Closed source plugins using SDK

Forum for plugin, effect and behavior programmers. Please use the Help & Support forum for help using Construct.

Post » Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:08 am

I want to clarify that closed source plugins using the SDK is OK. If you want to sell your plugins, that's also fine. I haven't sorted out the license yet but I'm going to try and find a suitable one that allows derivative works to do this. If anyone has any suggestions for a suitable license, let me know :)
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,949
Reputation: 178,544

Post » Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:12 pm

GPL/GNU?
B
2
G
4
Posts: 27
Reputation: 1,104

Post » Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:37 pm

If a suitable open source license doesn't already existing maybe dual licensing is the solution. Use a standard license like GPL for the C++ source code but then have a second license that only applies to plug-in developers that doesn't require publishing their source code under the GPL but only covers plug-in development so they can't use it to make proprietary fork of Construct without your permission.
B
2
G
4
Posts: 57
Reputation: 1,164

Post » Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:55 am

Can't we use something like Creative Commons Licensing?

http://creativecommons.org/

Hope that helped, I'm not sure it fits for the application, but you can check it out!

Best,

Joystick
B
1
G
4
Posts: 2
Reputation: 1,029

Post » Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:12 am

I fear CC is a bit too simple.

@snoopbaron
Perhaps a BSD license, with a clause that states, closed source plugins require an endorsement.
With the endorsement granting them the right to use a license relating only to that specific plugin.
So long as that license, the plugin, or any of its derivatives, does not imply any warranty by Construct.
Image Image
B
161
S
48
G
90
Posts: 7,347
Reputation: 66,749

Post » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:36 pm

i remember seeing something like this over here
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/

couldnt you make plugins have no licensing terms? allowing the developper to apply their own terms and distribute them however they please.
B
52
S
7
G
6
Posts: 1,945
Reputation: 7,610

Post » Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:50 pm

I guess "newt" CC it's a bit simplified.

Yes, "QuaziGNRLnose" that seems a good idea,

It's something that reminds me of the licensing that the "VST" plugins standard has and it's available from http://www.steinberg.net/en/company/3rd ... loper.html check it out.

Greets!

Panoz
B
1
G
4
Posts: 2
Reputation: 1,029


Return to Construct engineering

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests