Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Enrahim2" data-source="post: 8911170" data-attributes="member: 7039850">I can answer as a software engineer. "Paraphrasing" the free source code of an open source project into your closed source project is something we know to not be OK. Looking at open source for educational purposes to get ideas for how elements can be used are commonly accepted though.The concept that there is a distinction between the elements that make up a system and the whole system hence is something that come natural to us.Another thing to be aware of is that it is possible to construct source code that look remarkably similar to "everyday language". Hence the level of paraphrasing you might imagine having to take place might not be so substantial as you might think. For instance "if you fall, you take 1d6 damage per 10 feet falled" might come out as something like "if(event.type == fall) takeDamage(dice(6).times(event.heightInFeet/10));". In this regard the writing the code would be more likened to translation than any kind of pure reexpression.Luckily the proposed CC appear to include almost everything that would be natural to include in code form, so this isn't really a question at all. The big issue is with the things that in a software project would normally be found in asset packs. This would for instance be the numerical values describing the stats and combat abilities of the owlbear. If these values were punched into any tool while looking at the owlbear statblock without a license to use it, that would to me appear an obvious copyright issue. It wouldn't matter if that tool was a programming language, a hex editor or some nice graphical vtt npc sheet. It would still be "copying" in my mind. (However the question if a statblock is copyrightable I leave to the lawyers. At least in my mind it do not align with my internal understanding of a "process")</blockquote>

Verification