Selling Plugins and copyright

So, I'm a bit curious about selling plugins, as well as copyrighting them. I've read all sorts of things ranging from being able to sell the, to not even being able to copyright the plugin due to dependencies on Bukkit. So, my question is a bit simple. Can a developer sell a plugin?

I know that it's against the Bukkit TOS to sell or advertise products here, so please don't bring that up.

I'm also aware it's perfectly fine to hire a plugin developer and pay them for the time they're spending, not for the plugin directly.

 

Interestingly, im not sure. I do know that the MobileAdmin team sells their mobile app, but the plugin jar is free...

 

That is really interesting!

 

Anyone else have anything to say on this? Like CorrieKay said, there are plugins that offer a free .jar, and then charge for the other part of the plugin.

Would it be legal to charge people purely for the download, and then restrict in the copyright their ability to share it with others?

 

mbaxter can tell us?

 

I shall just leave this here

 

http://forums.bukkit.org/threads/left-bukkitdev.71720/page-3#post-1099945

 

GNU's take on the GPL and sales http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

 

Those are two pretty interesting posts. What Tog posted shows that our plugins technically have to be licensed under the GPL. At first that seems like a clear "NO" to being able to sell plugins, but what Sagacious_Zed posted, says that we can indeed sell plugins.

I think I'm going to go read the GPL and figure out all the limitations and such.

EDIT(and a long one): Just looked at the licensing and such. Looks like you could sell a plugin using the following steps:
1. Give each purchaser a unique key. Make it connect to your website, and if there's already an online server using said key, disallow the plugin.
2. Because GPL allows for users to modify the plugin, and thus get around the DRM, obfuscate the source code to an extreme degree.
3. If hackers/users find a way around it, change it in your next update. Move classes around, change things as much as possible, maybe even use a different obfuscator.

The main things this method would prevent are:
- People redistributing as allowed in the GPL.
- People getting around DRM as allowed in the GPL.

The main flaw is that you still have to provide the source code. However, looking around I don't see any way you could be punished if you didn't provide the source code. Unless I'm misunderstanding (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html).
The copyright holder has to be the one to press the matter. I'm guessing that because these are plugins, the copyright holder would be the Bukkit project, and so they'd have to be the ones to press the matter. I doubt they really want to get involved all that bad, and if they did, all we'd have to do is release the source code. Although, they might be able to sue the seller because of this. Once again, that'd be way out of proportion for the average plugin.

Another good way to limit it would be to only allow registered and paid users to download the files. It wouldn't be perfect(they could always just send them to eachother, and legally do so), but it would help a bit.

 

As far as Copyright goes. You can Copyright any Code that YOU write. PERIOD. As far as Writing a plugin that calls API's form another app and selling it, Yes you can as long as your not compiling there jar directly with yours or you have permission to do so. This does not mean that you can sell it on the bukkit website though. You MUST comply with there rules. You could distribute and sell it from your own website or another that allowed you to.

BTW just don't use a GPL type license on your code. Do an All Rights Reserved.

 

Or just get the approval of the administration. Heh.

 

It's the same as writing an addon for MS Word and selling it. Legal. MS Word is Copyright and you cannot legaly sell it, but you can write an AxtiveX or Addon program for MS Word and Copyright it AND sell it.

Bottom line is Yes You Can , but just don't Sell it on the bukkit website without their permission to sell on their website.

 

Technically, any plugin that isn't released under the GPL is in breach of the GPL, because Bukkit is GPL and all plugins link against Bukkit.

In practice, authors of non-compliant plugins are unlikely to be sued, because a) it wouldn't really be worth anyone's time to do it, and b) it would open a whole can of worms about the legality of CraftBukkit/Bukkit which Mojang currently appears to benevolently overlook... (to be fair, it wouldn't be in Mojang's interest to rock the boat - the Bukkit team certainly does not condone piracy of the client and the CB server modding scene has surely drawn plenty of paying players to Minecraft).

However, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that someone with a grudge could take you to court and demand the release of your all-rights-reserved source code. On top of that, if someone were to decompile your JAR (trivially easy to do, a little harder if you obfuscate) and release the code (or a modification) under the GPL, you'd have a hard time pursuing them in court when your plugin was in breach of the GPL in the first place...

 

Looks like someone didn't read the OP!

 

He may of said he didn't want it, but the fact is it is still there and his question was 'So, my question is a bit simple. Can a developer sell a plugin? '

And i gave him the answer. So he was just turning down the answer by saying he didn't want it

It's like asking 'I know i'm not allowed to steal, but can i rob a bank?'

 

a few things I would contribute to this conversation...

1) the GPL license does not require that the source code be publicly available, it requires that it be available upon request; so technically you don't have to put it out there for the world to see, but rather just oblige nosy developers upon request; and even upon request you could simply deny (in violation of the GPL license) for reason number two.

2) I think this whole thing boils down to what desht is getting at, practicality. Sure someone could pursue this to the level of taking you to court, but the initial investment cost to purchase a Minecraft plug-in from a developer would likely range from 5$ to 100$ depending on the complexity... What right minded person would hire a lawyer to bring charges against you over such a trivial amount; the lawyer retainer fees would probably be four times the cost of the plug-in.

Simply put, the scale of any bukkit plug-in would be far too small to provoke a party to bring legal charges against you, unless it was a personal vendetta like desht stated.

I should note, I am not a lawyer and nothing I said holds any legal barring; I am simply providing my perspective.

 

You cant sell a plugin because that would be a breach of GPL as stated above. BUT what you can do is sell all the services around that plugin. Do it like most linux builds, sell support etc.

Because of the license thats covering linux, developers arent allowed to sell a linux dist but they can sell support for it.

And to be fair, in my view, hiding the source and trying to charge for it is egoistic. Its not helping the community and its sure as hell not contributing to it which is pretty everything this community stands for.

Dont be a douche, release your source so that others can contribute to it, make spinoffs etc, which will bring the community forward.

 

Actually, the GPL doesn't strictly prevent you selling GPL'd software. You just need to provide the source upon request. In practice though, there's nothing to stop someone forking/cloning your project and releasing it for free (also under the GPL, of course) - so GPL'd software is not normally sold for profit. (Then of course, there's the possibility of dual-licensing, but that's a whole separate topic).

Agreed completely. The Bukkit team have done a lot of hard work and made it available for free. It just seems wrong to profit from that. I should add that I have no concern about voluntary donations, and no problem with bespoke proprietary plugins that aren't released publicly. But marketing and selling closed-source plugins is not cool, IMHO.

 

The answer was yes, he can sell a plugin. Just not on the Bukkit forums, which he already knew he couldn't.

 

To be honest, this is the way I see this:
You are building against Bukkit (the API), which is licensed under GPL.
GPL states that derivative work must be under the same license.

The problem is that you are not including Bukkit's (or even CraftBukkit's) code in your plugin. That means that your plugin consists only of your code.

This also means that your plugin doesn't have to be GPL at all!

I am a big fan of open-source, so I'd recommend that you open-source your work, but from the legal point of view (from what I understand), you're free to use any license you like.

(Here's someone who thinks like me: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01128.html. Also, this is a really discussable question - http://www.law.washington.edu/lta/swp/law/derivative.html)

 

Are you sure this is true? I'm admittedly not an expert, but I don't know if it's as clear cut as this.

Yes, if you were to make modifications to the Bukkit project itself, you'd have to release your new version with the same license. But is a separate project that just depends on Bukkit bound to the same license? What if your project also depends on another library that isn't compatible with GPL? What do you do then?

Again, I'm no expert, but it seems to me that a project shouldn't be bound to the same license if it only depends on another project, but doesn't actually modify that project. I think this has been discussed before, and a clear answer has never been given (probably because there really isn't one).

Also, it's silly to claim that a plugin is in breach of GPL when the entire Bukkit project is probably technically illegal.

 

Basically, short answer is yes, long answer is no.

As Acrobot stated, from a legal point of view, you can sell your plugins.

But, along with that, you're going to have a hard time doing so seeing as very few people will pay for plugins, as well as most plugin developers (and server owners, from a security point of view) prefer that plugins be open source, along with the fact you're not allowed to here on the Bukkit forums. And, as others said, don't be a douche.

So yes, you can, but it's highly impractical, and you'll likely lose respect from the community as a plugin developer.

This. This also makes me wonder about how the official modding API will work - having an open source API based on a closed source game?

EDIT by Moderator: merged posts, please use the edit button instead of double posting.

 

Many closed-source games have modding support, it shouldn't be a problem.

 

I just don't understand the sense of entitlement that open source developers have... Why is it that because someone wants to profit from their hard work and intellectual property that they inheirently become a douche? I am in full support of both developers who share their efforts in hopes to push forward their programming community and those individuals who wish to keep a few cards up their sleeve to provide their projects a sense of uniqueness.

Honestly, I feel the people who complain about this type of thing lack imagination and simple wish to make everything publicly available so they can hack appart other peoples creativity and pass it off as their own because they tweaked a few features... This isn't original development, it's modification.

If this user chose to sell his plug-in it wouldn't impact the communities progression in any way, shape or form. The developer instead would likely lose a large percentage of interested parties due to the fact that many alternative plug-ins are free of cost. It all seems to me like a fair trade off of popularity for profit, which if the plug-in was known for having above standard performance in some nature I would absolutely invest money into the development of the project to assure it's continued development (give the man a little insentive to keep up the good work).

I guess what I am getting at is all of the moaning and complaining about "stop being a douche, give us your work for free" is extremely insulting... What about the developer who made the project, shouldn't his efforts be rewarded, and if not why should he bother in the first place... The progression of the community means little when the community never gives back.

It's the same reason why I donate to Bukkit regularly... Do I have to do it, no... But it's people that do donate that help keep the project/community alive; because just like this guy, if the community didn't show some level of appriciation the project would simply shut down.

 

I am sorry to say you are wrong. It don't matter what type of license something is under that you write a plugin for as long as you do not compile any of there code in with yours. You can license your code as you wish, because you are the owner of what you write. ONLY if you include code from someone else in your code do you have to be concened with their License and previsions.

I do agree that, with Java plugins anyway, it is very hard to protect your plugin. It is so easy for someone to access and modify your code.

 

So in your opinion where would a plug-in stand due to the dependancy on craftbukkit; because as far as I'm aware you cannot design a Bukkit plug-in without a dependancy on CraftBukkit, which in essense results in the source code of CraftBukkit being included with your project ( I am saying this as a question, not statement).

So is the dependancy on bukkit considered "including source code"?

 

You are making calls to bukkit but you do not complile Bukiit within your code.

Its like when I write a windows application and link to an existing DLL (Dynamic Link Library), that Microsoft or some other company copyright and sells, so my application can use there functionality. I am not compiling there DLL with my app I am just loading and using there functions in my application. This is done and legal to do. I may not be able to legaly distribute their DLL but I can make use of it as long ass the end user already has it.

 

I think you're confusing the GPL with the LGPL there. Compiling against Bukkit.jar is linking against GPL code, and the GPL is quite specific about that: you link with a GPL'd library, your code must be licensed under the GPL.

Doesn't matter if you "include" any code or not - see above.

But I'll repeat my original disclaimer - in practice, it probably isn't going to make an awful lot of difference, and as nisovin stated, the whole legal situation with CraftBukkit and Bukkit is a mess anyway.

 

What this boils down to is if a plugin is a derivatve work and I think you should read over the laws pertaining to the definition of derivative work.
In United States copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major, copyright-protected elements of an original, previously created first work (the underlying work).

Includes not Access

I do not compile the bukkit jar in my plugin. Some people may include the bukkit jar in their plugin and compile it but if you do not compile there jar with yours it is not a derivative work.

 

You're both getting your information from different places. What desht is saying is actually part of the GPL license. Reading through the license, it clearly states that plugins have to be licensed under the same license. I, of course, am a relative novice to legal jargon, and could be misreading it.