Because there is nothing in the GPL that forbids you from linking with propietary code like the Minecraft Server
True, but the GPL certainly does prohibit you from distributing the combination. That is why the Linux kernel uses GPL shims for binary driver blobs which are themselves distributed separately.
It's right, but not quite complete. Mojang is now the developer of CraftBukkit and Bukkit. So one of the previous Bukkit developers is asserting their copyright to try and prevent Mojang (or anyone) from distributing the infringing CraftBukkit mod.
Again, the parent is also missing the important point that any individual person is still perfectly within their rights if they personally compile and use CraftBukkit. Only distribution of the GPL/incompatible combo code/binaries is prohibited.
Mojang could have shut down CraftBukkit any time they wanted to. But so can any of the Bukkit developers, because it's not in compliance with the GPL either.
I guess you missed that Mojang is now the owner/distributor of both Bukkit and CraftBukkit? Of course they don't hold copyright for all of the various previous commits to Bukkit. So, indeed as you say, one of the Bukkit developers is asserting copyright to prevent Mojang from using Bukkit in CraftBukkit while the "Craft" part of that is incompatibly licensed.
Yes, putting his projects under GPL was not legal in the first place because it linked to non-GPL code.
False. As an accurate AC stated above:
His code is in a project which doesn't depend on the Minecraft server code. It is also, illegally, used in a mod which does depend on the server code.
His code is in a project which doesn't depend on the Minecraft server code. It is also, illegally, used in a mod which does depend on the server code.
The AC is accurate; your comment isn't.
Bukkit contains parts of Minecraft server or reverse engineered parts of Minecraft server?
It's decompiled. Java is actually pretty easy to decompile well, for example here is a good decompiler which I sometimes use. Even has IDE plugins...
this idea that he was bored and just wanted to fuck around and pull his gun on some dude in the dark is nuts.
You must not know any police officers.
You forgot the third option in this case. If Ximpleware is open to it, they could pay for a commercial license.
Right, and contra the parent, if e.g. Ximpleware already had a commercial licensing option, damages could surely be based upon the cost of that license.
"A car is just a big purse on wheels." -- Johanna Reynolds
