[Freeciv] Re: forced open source

[Ed Cogburn <ecogburn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike Jing wrote:
> 
> >From: Stan Shebs <shebs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Reply-To: shebs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >To: "Per I. Mathisen" <Per.Inge.Mathisen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >CC: freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: [Freeciv] Re: forced open source
> >Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 10:11:58 -0700
> >
> >>- This is a freeciv list, not a copyright or politics discussion
> >>list. Please stay on topic and please do not feed the troll.
> >
> >No, this is a genuine long-term issue for Freeciv developers, who
> >ought to plan for the possibility of a collision.  As Linux grows
> >its user base, and Hasbro starts looking at Linux to make some $$$,
> >there's a good chance that they will decide to take some action.
> 
> Agreed.  We should certainly look into this more carefully.  Given Hasbro's
> track record in this area, it's best to be prepared.


        Isn't the problem really about the tech tree and unit names which are
100% same as tech tree and units in CivII?  All we need is generic
tech tree without specific names, i.e., "Tech Level 1 of xyz Category"
with a different web of interconnections, and generic names for the
units, like "Infantry", which starts as "1-1-1" (Warriors), then 1-2-1
(Phalanx), then 3-2-1 (Archers), etc, etc.  We could have this
"generic" system as the default ruleset, but provide a location on the
net somewhere (not from freeciv.org) where a clone Civ II ruleset
could be found with current unit names and fully defined tech tree. 
Wouldn't this be all that is needed?  If Hasbro attacks, the clone
ruleset would be the only victim, and would just go "underground" on
the net, since most/all players will keep a copy of that ruleset in
case of Hasbro assault.


-- 
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." - Voltaire

Ed C.