Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is a While this term can technically apply to open-source software, it's more typically used to refer to distinguish software which doesnthat is 't strictly count as FLOSS, ''not''' considered open-source even though the source code is readily publicly available to the public. Two of the most common subcategories are:
→Source-available software
==Source-available software==
===Non-commercial software===
</blockquote>
Despite this, non-commercial licenses have long been seen as a desirable or even essential option by some emulator developers, either for a multitude of reasons. One commonly given reason is to specifically pre-empt others from bundling their code into a proprietary payware package (even though this would also be a flagrant violation of copyleft licenses like the GPLv3) or using it in a pre-built [[Emulation Boxes|emulation box]] without their explicit permission, or . There are also some devs who prefer to explicitly denote their emulators as "non-commercial software" because they simply haven't considered the possibility of any more legitimate commercial use cases for their projects. Or sometimes they do it out of caution that re about the original hardware manufacturer could take taking them to court, despite the fact that [[#Legality of emulation|the manufacturer's only grounds to stand on is whether the underlying technology behind a console is patented]].
Whatever reason the dev gives for a non-commercial clause in the software license, it ''should'' be of no consequence to the average typical emulator end -user who just wants a free emulator to play retro console games on their PC. Some specific circumstances, such as a developer who's making a brand new commercial game for an old system and using an emulator to test it in lieu of real hardware, ''might'' be exceptions to this, but that's where it gets pretty murky from a legal standpoint.
However, ''developers'' of emulators must take extra precaution when working with code from a non-commercial emulator. As it is by definition not free software, the code is incompatible with the GPL, and the developer must take care not to mix GPL and non-commercial code. One example where this becomes relevant is with forks of old versions of MAME prior to its re-licensing to open-source. These forks can incorporate BSD code from the newest MAME versions, but are forbidden from including GPL MAME code. It has also been argued by some that RetroArch's ability to auto-download non-commercial cores is a license violation, as RetroArch is GPL-licensed and makes profit via Patreon.
