Question about Pore

I heard about the Pore plugin, the bridge between sponge ans bukkit. So I have a question about it. Is there a chance of it being copyright striked because of thay it uses bukkit code?

I asked the same question 1 hour ago in the irc channel
they said yes everybody who has contributed to bukkit would be able to take future projects that include the bukkit api down

Wether you can copyright an api is still in the debate. But the pore plugin doesn’t contain any bukkit code, it only implements its specifications. So I doubt that would happen.

1 Like

of course it implements bukkit code…
the bukkit api code
of course none of the craftbukkit stuff should be included
but you cant support bukkit plugins without the bukkit API :wink:

Pore should be OK to distribute.

Technically, the rule is that you can’t distribute GPL code along side proprietary code.

Their distribution would be a legal distribution:

Bukkit (GPL) + Pore (MIT) + SpoutAPI (MIT)

All components are GPL-compatible (GPL or more permissive)

The problem is that Sponge needs to stay away from Bukkit. If Sponge developed something like Pore, we couldn’t distribute it with Sponge.

This would give the following distribution:

Bukkit (GPL) + Sponge-BukkitWrapper (MIT) + SpongeAPI (MIT) + Sponge (MIT + Mojang)

This is not a valid distribution, since it mixes GPL and Mojang code.

In theory, if we kept the wrapper as a separate distribution, it would be OK.

The CraftBukkit repo was issued with a take down notice, even though only Bukkit was infringing. In addition, the Bukkit repo doesn’t contain any Mojang code either, so it isn’t infringing. It is only when linked with CraftBukkit that the infringement happens.

Nobody is bothered to get them back up though.


No, it doesn’t. The bukkit api is basically just a specification. Craftbukkit is it’s implementation. The API says where stuff should be and how the plugin is supposed to use it. It defines it’s intended functionality. It doesn’t offer an implementation. (Which is, as I said, what CraftBukkit is.) Also, as mentioned before, there is no real decision on wether you can copyright an API.

what i meant is that it defnitly needs to use the bukkit api…
the interfaces that are the bukkit api…
otherwise it would defnitly not be able to talk to bukkit plugins

so the problem is that everybody who has contributed to the bukkitAPI would be able to can claim his copyright on the bukkit api (according to the ppl in the irc channel)

Bukkit has operative code though. For example, Bukkit (not CraftBukkit) loads all the plugins. Basically, any class that isn’t an interface (or maybe enum) is functional code.

afaik is it possible to replace the pluginloader and eventhandler etc. with an own version the bukkitapi you should be able to remove all operational code from bukkit…
(and of course if its true that apis cant be copyrighted)

afk: forking bukkit and replacing operational code :wink: :smiley:

I cant wait and see what comes out of the whole sponge project, will be interesting to see what happens, I have used bukkit for awhile and i will miss it, lets hope sponge is better than bukkit

The BukkitAPI did not get taken down, the CraftBukkit implementation did, so if only the API itself is used it should be legal. Even the official BukkitAPI github repo is still online.

Would be perfectly legal. Bukkit is GPL and as long as Pore is GPL (or other public license) it should be fine. Pore isn’t going to be an implementation, its just going to be a plugin.

You could just replace it if it was really and issue xD

Right. You could take the interfaces and remove all the classes.

I think there is a court case over interfaces though.

Indeed. It was decided in favour of the person implementing the interfaces, but it was brought up again.

The problem and the original problem arise from the fact that Craftbukkit’s GPL license is not valid. It was used for code that was not authorized to be in the project (ie. the actual minecraft server code). Since Mojang’s server code was in the code, the GPL was invalidated and all the contributors never legally transferred the rights to their code to Bukkit. Thus, we’re in the mess we are in now. So, it wouldn’t be legal to use Craftbukkit inside Pore.

I don’t understand how Pore exactly will work or if it will be allowed, but Pore won’t be able to distribute Bukkit’s code in it, as all the developers have licenses to the code in that. It would get DMCA’d.

Ok, quit worrying about the legalities of it, pore is not meant to really be a permanent solution anyways, it is mean to tide over plugins that use the Bukkit API to Sponge until there can be an official or unofficial port made. BukkitAPI does not have an invalid license, nor was it affected by Wolfe’s DCMA. The Bukkit API does not use minecraft server code itself AFAIK, only the craftbukkit implementation did making its GPL license valid anyways.

As long as Pore uses original implementation code and is licensed under GPL then it will be perfectly legal for it to use the Bukkit code (not the craftbukkit code). Pore will just be a wrapper of the Bukkit API for Sponge.

Just checked the repo and its licensed under MIT meaning that it can’t use Bukkit’s GPL code.

The MIT license is GPL-compatible.