Nvidia making GameWorks Source Code Publicly available

[bru]

I was going to look at the AMD GPUopen license agreement, but I just get this page which I did find funny.

Spoiler

Source: http://developer.amd.com/amd-license-agreement/ does it happen for you?

 

[nitram100]

Thanks AMD

 

[AlamoX]

Object Code: Developer agrees not to disassemble, decompile or reverse engineer the Object Code versions of any of the Materials. Developer acknowledges that certain of the Materials provided in Object Code version may contain
third party components that may be subject to restrictions, and expressly agrees not to attempt to modify or distribute such Materials without first receiving consent from NVIDIA.

so nothing changed, github gives you sample of the base source code, but if the Devs get the blackbox version of the feature(object code) they cannot see what's in it or modify it or optimize it, it's still up to nvidia to put whatever they like on that blackbox.
and having a sample of the base code open to the public doesnt change the fact that the blackbox code could be completly different, not like that matters since only nvidia can see and optimize it.
this open github thing is complitely pointless then, nothing changed other than the fact that nvidia now can say "hey you have a sample of THE code on github", but the correct sentence should be "you have a sample of A code on github"

 

[fs123]

The code license can and likely would be be revoked if a game performed better on AMD than on Nvidia due to some modifications.
I don't see many devs modifying it for that reason alone.

Pretty pointless having such code when Nvidia can prevent you from using it half way through development.

Does GPUOpen have such a clause. I somehow doubt it.

 

[AlamoX]

I was going to look at the AMD GPUopen license agreement, but I just get this page which I did find funny.

Spoiler

Source: http://developer.amd.com/amd-license-agreement/ does it happen for you?

it's MIT licence, just google it and you get the same license on wiki.
but here is the license from gpuopen github , basicaly just open any feature and scroll down to license, it's the same for all assets

Spoiler

Copyright (c) 2016 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. All rights reserved.

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN
THE SOFTWARE

 

[thesmokingman]

The code license can and likely would be be revoked if a game performed better on AMD than on Nvidia due to some modifications.
I don't see many devs modifying it for that reason alone.

Pretty pointless having such code when Nvidia can prevent you from using it half way through development.

Does GPUOpen have such a clause. I somehow doubt it.

There's no restrictions with the MIT license.

 

[D.P.]

Object Code: Developer agrees not to disassemble, decompile or reverse engineer the Object Code versions of any of the Materials. Developer acknowledges that certain of the Materials provided in Object Code version may contain
third party components that may be subject to restrictions, and expressly agrees not to attempt to modify or distribute such Materials without first receiving consent from NVIDIA.

so nothing changed, github gives you sample of the base source code, but if the Devs get the blackbox version of the feature(object code) they cannot see what's in it or modify it or optimize it, it's still up to nvidia to put whatever they like on that blackbox.
and having a sample of the base code open to the public doesnt change the fact that the blackbox code could be completly different, not like that matters since only nvidia can see and optimize it.
this open github thing is complitely pointless then, nothing changed other than the fact that nvidia now can say "hey you have a sample of THE code on github", but the correct sentence should be "you have a sample of A code on github"

Nvidia have only released some of the gamesworks libraries to github, tthey announced more will follow. If a developer uses one of the libraries with source code provided in github then they no longer have to use the precompiled version and there is no black box. That is the whole damn point!

 

[humbug]

Object Code: Developer agrees not to disassemble, decompile or reverse engineer the Object Code versions of any of the Materials. Developer acknowledges that certain of the Materials provided in Object Code version may contain
third party components that may be subject to restrictions, and expressly agrees not to attempt to modify or distribute such Materials without first receiving consent from NVIDIA.

so nothing changed, github gives you sample of the base source code, but if the Devs get the blackbox version of the feature(object code) they cannot see what's in it or modify it or optimize it, it's still up to nvidia to put whatever they like on that blackbox.
and having a sample of the base code open to the public doesnt change the fact that the blackbox code could be completly different, not like that matters since only nvidia can see and optimize it.
this open github thing is complitely pointless then, nothing changed other than the fact that nvidia now can say "hey you have a sample of THE code on github", but the correct sentence should be "you have a sample of A code on github"

Yeah, thats how it looks, its not open source, perhaps Nvidia just uploaded it to github for more exposure.

No one should use it for any project they plan to make public without first talking to Nvidia, if you do Nvidia may take your House, your Car, your Cat and your wife may run off with your CD's.

 

[AlamoX]

The code license can and likely would be be revoked if a game performed better on AMD than on Nvidia due to some modifications.
I don't see many devs modifying it for that reason alone.

Pretty pointless having such code when Nvidia can prevent you from using it half way through development.

Does GPUOpen have such a clause. I somehow doubt it.

afaik, no devs buys gamework license, and there is 2 different ones one with the code, and one with the blackbox, when Nvidia sponsor games and they get implementation of gameworks in exchange through the object code version(blackbox) of the feature, this is probably the case for like 99% of gameworks games, nvidia still hold a grip on what's in the blackbox, and how they optimize it, before they denied that Devs were unable to optimize it, now the license shows you, that they lied, and yes Devs cannot modify it, and claiming that there is the option of source code feature is irrelevent if like 99% of the games use the blackbox version.

 

[D.P.]

Yeah, thats how it looks, its not open source, perhaps Nvidia just uploaded it to github for more exposure.

No one should use it for any project they plan to make public without first talking to Nvidia, if you do Nvidia may take your House, your Car, your Cat and your wife may run off with your CD's.

Well you can't even download it without first talking to nvidia so that a rather moot point.

 

[humbug]

Well you can't even download it without first talking to nvidia so that a rather moot point.

Whats this? https://github.com/NVIDIAGameWorks/FaceWorks

 

[AlamoX]

Nvidia have only released some of the gamesworks libraries to github, tthey announced more will follow. If a developer uses one of the libraries with source code provided in github then they no longer have to use the precompiled version and there is no black box. That is the whole damn point!

when i read the license this is what i understand, nvidia offers 2 versions:
1- source code : where Devs have the code on github and are free to modify, this is the highest license cost.
2- object code : which is basicaly a balckbox, where Devs have no knowledge or control on what is in it, this is the cheaper cost license
knowing that most Devs Do NOT pay for gameworks, but rather get sponsoring from nvidia and they are offered or recover the cost of the license for gameworks through bundles, marketing, etc, most of the implementations comes in object code format, which is according to my reading of the license is a blackbox.
but it would be really usefull to have like a list of all gamework games, and how many used option 1 or 2...

 

[andybird123]

Eh, you can't charge licence fees for stuff on git hub, that's the whole point

There seems to be some confusion as there are two licence files in the root and subfolders, one of which is "restrictive" and the other is standard BSD, there's also a statement by Nvidia that they will clarify, the intention being that it will use the same standard licence they use on their code examples (e.g. open to use)

 

[fs123]

What happens if a dev uses the source code for a feature and heavily modifies it so that it works on AMD better than Nvidia? Is Nvidia going to sit back like AMD did with PureHair (ROTTR) and ignore it or will they say sorry we'll just revoke this license thank you very much..bye bye.

 

[bru]

knowing that most Devs Do NOT pay for gameworks, but rather get sponsoring from nvidia and they are offered or recover the cost of the license for gameworks through bundles, marketing, etc, most of the implementations comes in object code format, which is according to my reading of the license is a blackbox.

You know all this, WOW.

I assume that these facts are posted online somewhere and it is not another case of , this is what I think therefore it is fact, that has happened on this forum before, from fans of both sides.

 

[drunkenmaster]

It has everything to do with this. The License is completely standard, of course Nvidia have the right to terminate the license agreement. If a developer breaks the licensing rules then of course Nvidia will want to terminate the license, it would make the entire license pointless if the developer could do whatever they wanted with no repercussions.


Gamesworks isn't being made license free or under any kind of freeware license, it is a propriety license that lets developers view and modify the source code to their hearts content and mitigate any claims that it is a black box they can't optimize against. Developers can modify as they wish and pass on the modification to other developers as well.

Nvidia is just maintaining the IP ownership of the source code, which is perfectly understandable.

The whole point of making something open source is you let people use it, change it and do what they want with it, and licence free. That fact is why people take open source code then build programs or features using it, if another company can at any time, maybe after days, weeks, months or even years of work just tell you that you can't use it any more it defeats the entire purpose.

Making something open source means exactly giving up those rights to withdraw it.

More to the point if developers still have to licence it and Nvidia still maintains seemingly prices game devs out of actually buying the source code license so they all use the black box license... then we have no clue what is in that. Holding up code in one hand and a black box in the other but saying it's the same code inside makes the black box entirely pointless... the only reason for it, IMHO, is if the code in the black box is different.

AS yet the majority of devs using gameworks have stated when questioned about it that they DO NOT have access to the source code, so the majority of developers only have the black box license. I've actually not seen a single game dev who implemented gameworks say they had the source code license.

Also more to the point you stated multiple times through this thread that Nvidia was ALWAYS willing to give away the source code to devs. This is patently false because for a decent length of time after gameworks was available there was no source code license at all so Nvidia were absolutely not willing to give developers the source code. For multiple years before stuff like physx was folded into gameworks there was no source code license for Physx or any other code Nvidia worked with devs on. They only announced a source code version of the Gameworks license after they were criticised by everyone for an extremely long time and since they've done that game devs only claim to have the blackbox version.

It's a complete joke to suggest Nvidia were always willing to provide source code when they for a fact, categorically were not willing to do so for a very very long time and this appears yet again like a PR stunt claiming to be more open without actually, you know, being more open.

 

[D.P.]

Whats this? https://github.com/NVIDIAGameWorks/FaceWorks

My Bad. I thought I read somewhere that you had to register with Nvidia as a developer to get credentials before accessing github page. As it is you actually automatically become licensed as soon as you download it.

This is actually better, now anyone can just browse the code and if they like what they see can shoot Nvidia an email

 

[D.P.]

when i read the license this is what i understand, nvidia offers 2 versions:
1- source code : where Devs have the code on github and are free to modify, this is the highest license cost.
2- object code : which is basicaly a balckbox, where Devs have no knowledge or control on what is in it, this is the cheaper cost license
knowing that most Devs Do NOT pay for gameworks, but rather get sponsoring from nvidia and they are offered or recover the cost of the license for gameworks through bundles, marketing, etc, most of the implementations comes in object code format, which is according to my reading of the license is a blackbox.
but it would be really usefull to have like a list of all gamework games, and how many used option 1 or 2...

Where do you see anything about cost?

License: Subject to the terms of this Agreement, NVIDIA hereby grants to Developer a royalty-free, non-exclusive license to possess and to use the Materials

It is royalty-free, which means there is no charge to use the source code at all. As I mentioned above, it seems nvidia grants the license as soon as you download it so any developer just downloads the source code and can use it free of charge.

So as i said, there are still some libraries that are only provided precompiled. Those compiled libs cannot be reverse-engineered. But all the source code is free to sue by the developer.

 

[D.P.]

What happens if a dev uses the source code for a feature and heavily modifies it so that it works on AMD better than Nvidia? Is Nvidia going to sit back like AMD did with PureHair (ROTTR) and ignore it or will they say sorry we'll just revoke this license thank you very much..bye bye.

Developers are allowed to modify the code, so Nvidia would have no grounds to revoke the license.

This is just hilarious watching the AMD crowd trying to undermine Nvidia's move Yiu guy should just be proud that AMD led the way and undoubtedly pushed Nvidia to follow!

 

[D.P.]

The whole point of making something open source is you let people use it, change it and do what they want with it, and licence free. That fact is why people take open source code then build programs or features using it, if another company can at any time, maybe after days, weeks, months or even years of work just tell you that you can't use it any more it defeats the entire purpose.

Making something open source means exactly giving up those rights to withdraw it.

More to the point if developers still have to licence it and Nvidia still maintains seemingly prices game devs out of actually buying the source code license so they all use the black box license... then we have no clue what is in that. Holding up code in one hand and a black box in the other but saying it's the same code inside makes the black box entirely pointless... the only reason for it, IMHO, is if the code in the black box is different.

AS yet the majority of devs using gameworks have stated when questioned about it that they DO NOT have access to the source code, so the majority of developers only have the black box license. I've actually not seen a single game dev who implemented gameworks say they had the source code license.

Also more to the point you stated multiple times through this thread that Nvidia was ALWAYS willing to give away the source code to devs. This is patently false because for a decent length of time after gameworks was available there was no source code license at all so Nvidia were absolutely not willing to give developers the source code. For multiple years before stuff like physx was folded into gameworks there was no source code license for Physx or any other code Nvidia worked with devs on. They only announced a source code version of the Gameworks license after they were criticised by everyone for an extremely long time and since they've done that game devs only claim to have the blackbox version.

It's a complete joke to suggest Nvidia were always willing to provide source code when they for a fact, categorically were not willing to do so for a very very long time and this appears yet again like a PR stunt claiming to be more open without actually, you know, being more open.

I'm not reading your wall o waffle because as always its undoubtedly full of nonsne.

To start with, Nvidia didn't release the source code under an open source license, the just opened up the source code for public usage under license. The rest of your rant is then fairly worthless.


your next point is also completely wrong, the spruce-code s offered royalty-free which means there are no charges to use it or modify it.