Mojang and the Bukkit Project

Discussion in 'Community News and Announcements' started by vubui, Sep 5, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Offline


    rcade Bukkit is GPL, derivate work from GPL need to be GPL and their source open ( CraftBukkit cannot be GPL or LGPL, it contains Minecraft code, to be valid it'd need to have Minecraft code open source.

    CraftBukkit was taken down, not Bukkit. There's no way out, either they remove bukkit from craftbukkit (impossible) or the minecraft server jar becomes open source.

    P.S. Also all plugins built for Bukkit are supposed to be GPL.
  2. This is one confusing point, as Wolvereness references his code in Bukkit-Bleeding with the DMCA. To the untrained eye it may appear to be about distributing the Bukkit API bundled inside of CraftBukkit. The simple solution would be to separate the distribution, i.e. let people get the Bukkit-API jar extra - however i fear that's not the whole story. At least implementing the Bukkit API should not force CB into GPL.

    Is there an actual problem with CraftBukkit staying LGPL, disregarding the distribution together with Bukkit? The code resulting of the decompilation is not the original MC server code, though i don't know what it counts for... does it need an extra license or not. At least it would seem somewhat strange to provide a blueprint for a license for "code resulting from decompilation".
  3. Offline


    CB contains tons of subclasses of Bukkit. CraftPlayer, CraftWorld, etc. It makes it a derative work of a GPL project, which means the whole project has to be GPL. They'd need to make the Minecraft server jar seperate and make the users patch it, then it might work.
  4. Offline


    That's not what Mojang COO Vu Bui said in his recent post here: "The official Minecraft Server software that we have made available is not included in CraftBukkit. Therefore there is no obligation for us to provide the original code or any source code to the Minecraft Server, nor any obligation to authorize its use."

    As long as Mojang is OK with net.minecraft.server code being in CraftBukkit, there's no licensing issue with that code.
  5. I had to register an account just to say that's not how the GPL works. If a program contains any GPL'd code, then the entire program (100%) must be under either the GPL itself or a GPL-compatible license. "Not officially open source but the copyright holder said they're 'okay with it' in a forum post" is absolutely not a GPL-compatible license. It's not Mojang's IP that's being infringed here, so what they say doesn't matter. The people with legitimate claims of copyright infringement are the people who wrote GPL'd code that is being used in a program that also contains GPL-incompatible code, which is a very cut-and-dried violation of the GPL. The fact that the project was already infringing from the start does not in any way affect their current rights, it just highlights that the situation was unsustainable all along and this would have inevitably happened sooner or later.

    You can learn more here:
    sciguyryan and Bumper like this.
  6. It implements the Bukkit API and at the same time contains "a copy of the Bukkit API" for distribution, which does not seem to be such a big problem, as it "only" touches the distribution, at first glance. Now on the "would have"-side, you could as well separate the API from the implementation "easily", as i suggested above. So concerning possible solutions, this is one of the variations one has to cover, however this shouldn't justify a dmca of the CB code repository, unless they copied code from Bukkit in there (or unless implementing a GPL API demands your project to be GPL by default). The other uncovered aspect is, why the DMCA can work at all, because even if the license is void, it's not 100% clear if Wolvereness can claim copyright on his code in that way, because it's a joint work with a well-defined purpose. There are other side aspects, like him violating his own copyright and other. I can't judge this legally, i also don't really find it that interesting, because to me this is a) another case of "special U.S. law" in the first place, and b) it's against the purpose of the project and against common sense concerning the context of modding closed source / decompiled software. I just haven't seen any any posts, that really weighs the aspects against each other. No lack of posts claiming that 90% of other aspects don't count, though :p.

    As stated above i see two tricky aspects:
    a) Does it apply to LGPL.
    b) Does it actually justify the DMCA, i.e. stand enough ground at court.
    c) If a) applied, could it be repaired with one or two stitches (other than making the Minecraft decompiled (?!) code open source)?
  7. Offline


    rcade Doesn't matter if Mojang allows it or not and if it's mojang code or not. It could have been written from scratch.

    The problem is that the whole code needs to be open source. The CB repository did not contain the whole net.minecraft source. It only contained the files they needed to modify for the Bukkit hooks. The rest was added when the project was built. For example was missing because they didn't need to hook to that class.

    If you don't open source the whole project that implements another GPL project you are breaking the license.
  8. Offline


    The net.minecraft.server source code is in CraftBukkit, subject to the same license as the rest of the code in that project.

    Anyone who contributed code to Bukkit and CraftBukkit knew the genesis of the project and that net.minecraft.server code was created with the advice and implicit approval of Mojang. Since Mojang has owned the project for two years, the company's support for Bukkit is even more clear.

    There were 138 contributors to CraftBukkit, all pitching in code so that there would be an open source Minecraft server that ran mods. Their code shouldn't be taken off the net because one contributor is angry with Mojang.

    An issue like that could be resolved to bring the project into compliance. Either the code could be made available like the rest of the net.minecraft.server code or a separate download could be required for those files.

    EDIT by Moderator: merged posts, please use the edit button instead of double posting.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2016
  9. Offline


    Don't count on Mojang/Msft releasing code to bring CraftBukkit into compliance. I think what would be better would be for the project contributors to use a binary patch method like what Spigot is using.
  10. Offline


    At this point I think everyone that could do something has given up on CB. Mojang said that CB didn't include their code. So all Bukkit would need is to put all the code in the source. Then the dmca is invalidated (I know some said it wasn't valid but I believe it was, because not full source was open).
  11. A lot of server owners and plugin developers wouldn't want the hazzle to port everything over to something else, also there is still other projects that depend on CraftBukkit (at least one), so there might be a bunch of capable developers available in theory. They needn't pull off the whole thing the Bukkit project consisted off, but they could update and extend CraftBukkit. Though the longer it takes, ....

    Edit: Also some major plugins are suspected to port over to Sponge, so competition would be tough. Those plugins might still be made available for Bukkit, provided it's back up in time.
  12. Offline


    asofold Yes, there's a bunch of alternatives (too many imo). I'll be porting some of mines to sponge when they have something working.
  13. Offline


    Very Disappointing to say the least , Shame to see so many good people resign shame on Mojang for being so weak.
  14. Offline


    Wait how can something be a community project and at the same time be owned by mojang? That makes no sense.

    Also ofcourse he is mad that it was bought without the community knowing about it. He has developed for years for free and the four who were hired were the only ones to profit.
  15. If you want total freedom, write your own game or hope for the copyright law to change in your country. A "community project" can mean many things, it's not even clear who regards whom as "part of the community", regarding how people argue on things. A community project can be run by a community, if it's totally independent is another question.

    This has been discussed a hundred times throughout the threads already...
  16. Offline


    Thanks, I really hope bukkit isnt destryed by this, please start it up again if you can!
  17. Offline


    When I originally bought my copy of minecraft, it was promised that it would turn Open source upon full release (Minecraft 1.0). As I have not agreed to a modification of this legal agreement, Minecraft is Open source, at least in relation to me. As such, this whole dispute is bogus.
  18. Offline


    I don't understand. Who does Wesley work for?/ What relation does he have to Bukkit/CraftBukkit?
  19. Num3r1cal I'm not sure if he has a job or not, but that would be irrelevant to this point. He's not a Mojang employee. And he was one of the developers for Bukkit & CraftBukkit.
  20. Offline


    AdamQpzm Hold on, aren't Bukkit & CraftBukkit open source?
  21. Offline


    They were. They aren't atm due to the DMCA takedown.
  22. Offline


    First let me say i LOVE MC, My daughter LOVES MC but my god! Lets face facts here, as a user i don't care who owns what lump of code, who said what to whom and why someone has thrown their toys out the pram. At the end of the day lets face reality.

    Minecraft is a great game BUT...

    Once you have spent time building all the stuff you can think of there becomes a point as with all games that the appeal dies and like so many games becomes another piece of software taking up space on your hard drive. Updates are great but only go so far to help that lost appeal.

    Wohoo! red wood.........

    Bukkit, Spigot and MCPC+ Gives users the opportunity to expand on an already great game and keep that interest in the base game alive.

    Wohoo! Riding a scorpion up a mountain, wearing fur armour, avoiding werewolves and citizens sentries of my neighbours........

    The truth is that for minecraft to survive it needs a community and that community needs to have a voice and the ability to mod a game gives it that voice. Ask yourselves the question how many of you actually want to play Realms............
    Lovely idea, applaud the concept, Bored now.

    Mojang effectively own bukkit
    Not really a tricky one Bukkit has been out there a while now, allow the downloads so that the community can be up to date and modders can work towards the 1.8 release as well and we will wait for you.

    Choice between getting release 1.8 now, changing my entire server to a vanilla, losing my mods, maps and hundreds of game hours for me and my friends


    playing a modded 1.7.2 MC server until bukkit comes back or we get bored and go play something else.

    Easy answer.

    Tally ho! Elephant away..........
    AGC-Intra likes this.
  23. Offline


    Sorry if I'm being lazy but, can anyone tell me definitively, without me having to read through 25 pages of this thread, whether there are still ownership issues with Bukkit?
    My 9 year old nephew is well into this game (as am I of late) and he has expressed interested in learning to program. I'm a c++ programmer by trade and I think this game is a great motivator so I was thinking of getting him this book...
    I've noted however that there are issues with Bukkit which may mean it's impossible to develop with this toolkit and this above book is clearly geared in this direction. Is it still the case that we will have problems developing with Bukkit? Is it worth investing in this book for my nephew or are there other more recommended toolkits?
    Sorry if this is answered elsewhere, I'm fairly new to minecraft and its been many years since I touched Java.
    Any advice appreciated,

  24. Offline

    mbaxter ʇıʞʞnq ɐ sɐɥ ı

    mart7n Bukkit itself isn't a problem. But Bukkit is just the API. The only full implementation, CraftBukkit, is taken down via DMCA takedown notice. So, you could write things but would have a very unpleasant time trying to test them out as all downloads and source are unavailable for the foreseeable future.
  25. Offline


    Ok thanks for the info :) . I shall steer clear of this for now then.
    Are there other frameworks/books you would recommend for developing mods, introducing java programming via Minecraft to my nephew?
  26. Offline


    Can we get some updates what is going on with bukkit? Without bukkit a lot of servers will close..

  27. I would take a look at canarymod. Similar in outlook to Bukkit, having an open api and plugin architecture.
  28. Offline


    Is it owned by mojang as well?
  29. Offline


    Forge has no issue with creating an installer that modifies a minecraft server jar..... why isnt bukkit considering doing the same. i hear all these arguements about how bukkits not the problem, craftbukkit is, well, distribute bukkit via an installer that automatically patches an existing minecraft_server.jar on the users system, downloaded from Cauldron (formerly MCPC+) has already done something similiar with a manual patch method for adding Cauldron to an existing minecraft jar. And as far as paying the bukkit team goes, mojang lets be real, its the community that develops the plugins, you own the project, pay the developers of the API so that the community can develop its plugins.... its very simple, stop being so god damn money hungry and use some common sense. While you waste time avoiding obvious solutions, you're hurting noone but the players who have for so long been a part of this community, those that have created thousands of mods and plugins to publicly share with others, Those who are solely responsible for the continued interest in the game itself. without community made plugins and mods, minecraft is about as entertaining as pong after the first day. face it, its a fact.

    Thats my opinion

    awaiting moderator approval? now we have to have approval to share our thoughts and opinions on a community based website? this is getting to be rather absurd

    EDIT by Moderator: merged posts, please use the edit button instead of double posting.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2016
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page