The title says "open source" but then goes on to talk about leaked source. Unless a clean room RE was done, I don't think this can be called "open source". I want the thing in the title to exist, of course, but at best this seems like the sort of thing that won't be legal and free until we're all dead.
If anyone was interested in making a properly free CS:GO, they probably should avoid reading this post as it seems to show the leaked source.
This is a common 'copyright infringement NOT intended ALL rights belong to X' type of widespread misunderstanding of how copyright actually works, and it's why I'm convinced that if most people understood copyright they would think it was absurd.
Unlike other commenters, I think the author of the article meant to say you can't hope to license contributions built ontop leaked code, obviously, so it'll always be a gray area that one could call "public domain".
General point: Clean room reverse engineering is a common approach, from corporations keen to minimise their liability.
Nonetheless, clean room RE is not a legal requirement: certainly not in the EU, nor AIUI in the US.
The EU allows reverse engineering for interoperability. The EU allows reimplementations of APIs (as does the US). The EU also explicitly allows decompilation, where necessary.
Wait, there are EU regulations on this topic? I understood there wasn’t a common framework, and instead each countries in the EU have their own approach.
> (Art. 5). The legal owner of a program is assumed to have a licence to create any copies necessary to use the program and to alter the program within its intended purpose (e.g. for error correction). The legal owner may also make a back-up copy for his or her personal use. The program may also be decompiled if this is necessary to ensure it operates with another program or device (Art. 6), but the results of the decompilation may not be used for any other purpose without infringing the copyright in the program.
In a general sense, yes. However, I really don’t see how this would fall into that category. It looks like someone has a copy illegitimately and is trying to reimplement it.
Then a lot of people are objectively wrong. The license is an incredibly important and central part of what makes code open source or not. What you're describing is "source available". Failure to pay attention to the licensing can end you up in very big and expensive legal trouble. I strongly encourage you to update your terminology for you and anyone you communicate with's own safety.
Anyone who cares about open source by definition cares about copyright. That’s what the concepts of free software and open source software are built upon.
Intellectual property is a convention. Saying that nothing exists outside of that convention is like saying that someone without official papers does not exist (which is, unfortunately, not an odd occasional curiosity, but a hidden assumption permeating everyone's lives).
This is an open source code. It is not compatible with widespread economical system, but it is not any less open.
Well that's the difference between "open source" and "free software", no? "Open source", meaning that anyone can see/copy the source code, and "free software" meaning code that is licensed accordingly.
I always thought that "open source" has nothing to do with what's legal and what isn't, it just means that anyone can materially access the code.
No. Both of these terms are well described by the relevant organizations [1][2]. And "source the happens to be public" or "leaked source" does not imply any particular license.
no, that would be something like "source available" or "source visible". both open source and free software imply specific licenses, though they are not synonymous
This world view is quite perplexing, to be frank. On one hand, he urges potential users to switch to Linux, emphasizing its cost-free nature and the freedom it offers in terms of code and game direction. However, on the other hand, the code being used is stolen and leaked, thus infringing on the original creator's copyright. Additionally, the repository's license claims that all contributions are considered public domain, which adds to the oddity of the situation. Since there is no legitimate license permitting the existence of this code, it is even more peculiar that a custom license is being invented, allowing contributions to this clearly stolen source code to be considered public domain.
I was also confused, but I think their thesis statement is pretty enlightening:
> If we got nuked tomorrow, and Steam went down, anyone could have CSGO up and running in the Bunker LAN by next week. Years later when us smoothskins are rockin’ Power9 Rigs, we would also have the ability to recompile and port the game.
The lip service to "Open Source" and white-knighting is a little harsh, but I think this was made with honest intention. Someone wanted to make a thing and offer it to others in the spirit of open collaboration. Their wording is wrong, but their heart is in the right place.
Valve has been relatively permissive regarding open-sourcing and liberally licensing some of its properties under the right conditions. See its push for SteamOS and allowing Black Mesa to be sold for profit. However, it might have been a good idea to contact them about this before hosting modified stolen property, even if it was with good intentions. I've got a feeling that this repo won't last too long.
In jurisdictions with weak/non-existing copyright laws or copyright law enforcement, there is not much difference between "the source code can be found somewhere on the internet" and "open source". Quite a large part of the world people is living in such jurisdictions.
they're a bit confused about their terminology, but i think they are just coming at it from an archivist perspective. they wanted something that is self contained and can be used to compile the game for any platform
Also, really admire the level of skill, dedication, and degree of focus it took to pull this off.
I'm good at most of the areas used in this article, except the RE, and this was undoubtedly a TON of work for one lone wolf to execute on!
Huge respect for this person. Then creating such an amazingly detailed technical write-up with the entertaining story bits and cute references like ".. us smoothskins ..", I had to look it up:
Given the proprietary nature of most of the source code, I'm surprised the author's Github account hasn't been suspended yet. The blog post is from 2020 and everything's still online.
> Some weird schizoid managed to grab both these codebases during his work on some 900th attempt of a HL2 VR project and his major goal was to have this circle leak it to the public and fly to his girlfriends house (also involved in the valve community) and kill himself and her.
I am impressed with the amount of effort this bloke put to get this thing running, respect. I would rather see people talking about the insane hacks that were in the code.
I also had a chuckle when I saw the license
In a few days when valve lawyers knock on the door... he guys I said ALL DUE RESPECT, so its legal, its in the Geneva convention!!!
https://youtu.be/Af-Id_fuXFA
You could dev a PC AAA game and released it only for elf/linux. It is so easy to install free mainstream elf/linux distros, ppl will probably do it to play that big PC AAA game.
Probably a good thing as from my understanding there is an uncertainty whether a version of CSGO will exist. For example there are some old patch versions available from circa ~2013 which are still playable.
Not sure if that will be possible after the move to CS2. You would think so, but at the very least, "Kisak-Strike: Gentoo Offensive" will exist.
I'm not sure I understand this point. Can't you still play CS:Source and CS 1.6? Why wouldn't CS:Go keep operating. It may not get as many content updates but the core game should be able to keep going as long as Valve keeps the game servers running.
the source engine is horrible for making games. There are basically zero examples of a decent game made with it. Except Apex Legends, it was a herculean effort, and it still sucks. You inherit a ton of exploits and bugs(apex came out and you could do a 2005-era speedhack). Netvars are still bad. I almost guarantee they will not do another game in source.
idtech still towers over the source engine for any real "small" projects. The community support + license + codebase is just so much better.
The only reason to use source is if you are a superfan who wants to make derivative stinky cut-content projects, and VR ports. Otherwise, you're just enslaving yourself to the valve megacorp(unless you can afford an apex-style deal).
>idtech still towers over the source engine for any real "small" projects. The community support + license + codebase is just so much better.
idtech... 4 ? How badly do you hate your job that you agree to put up with this piece of shit ? Even pulling out Godot would be less crappy and have more support than an engine targeting DX9 and OpenGL released in 2002. idtech 4 is barely better than _goldsrc_. Some things ought to die, and idtech 4 is better suited to a museum than any real game these days. The lack of any useful and modern tools should already be a screaming red flag.
Am I the only one who isn't that impressed with the codebase quality? They are not even respecting the same coding convention in the same file for Christ!
It just looks so hacky and something from the early 2000s era when it comes to engine architecture... What am I missing? Shouldn't these guys be at the forefront of innovation when it comes to engine design? Last time I checked they were a multi-billion dollar company which prides in hiring only the best of the best. How the hell do the best of the best write this code where you find // HACK: everywhere?
Readit News
If anyone was interested in making a properly free CS:GO, they probably should avoid reading this post as it seems to show the leaked source.
> Please note that this code is property of Valve-Software and any contributions that you make are considered a donation into the public domain.
Nonetheless, clean room RE is not a legal requirement: certainly not in the EU, nor AIUI in the US.
The EU allows reverse engineering for interoperability. The EU allows reimplementations of APIs (as does the US). The EU also explicitly allows decompilation, where necessary.
Edit: I was wrong, I found the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Programs_Directive
> (Art. 5). The legal owner of a program is assumed to have a licence to create any copies necessary to use the program and to alter the program within its intended purpose (e.g. for error correction). The legal owner may also make a back-up copy for his or her personal use. The program may also be decompiled if this is necessary to ensure it operates with another program or device (Art. 6), but the results of the decompilation may not be used for any other purpose without infringing the copyright in the program.
Deleted Comment
Licences, to many people, are the domain of really fucking boring crusty nerds.
This is an open source code. It is not compatible with widespread economical system, but it is not any less open.
Open source is by definition legal to modify and spread. There is a number of open source compatible licenses.
Leaked source is just that. Leaked.
I always thought that "open source" has nothing to do with what's legal and what isn't, it just means that anyone can materially access the code.
[1] https://opensource.org/
[2] https://www.fsf.org/
> If we got nuked tomorrow, and Steam went down, anyone could have CSGO up and running in the Bunker LAN by next week. Years later when us smoothskins are rockin’ Power9 Rigs, we would also have the ability to recompile and port the game.
The lip service to "Open Source" and white-knighting is a little harsh, but I think this was made with honest intention. Someone wanted to make a thing and offer it to others in the spirit of open collaboration. Their wording is wrong, but their heart is in the right place.
Deleted Comment
<Edit: The best I can find so far are these~>
[1] https://git.botox.bz/BotoX/hl2_src-leak-2017/src/commit/21b3...
[2] https://hl2-beta.ru/index.php?topic=29120.0
Both of which lead to:
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:21dda6847dde983f2f8063739249d2d1d09a5dda
"April 22nd 2020, random leaked shit.rar" / 5.0GB
MD5: c053f2b60d104f61c3057d3d425abd25
SHA256: f77c6124b35b3a44966aa904cccc178342957e0e2d42e8588e240ce9533d6096
</Edit>
Also, really admire the level of skill, dedication, and degree of focus it took to pull this off. I'm good at most of the areas used in this article, except the RE, and this was undoubtedly a TON of work for one lone wolf to execute on! Huge respect for this person. Then creating such an amazingly detailed technical write-up with the entertaining story bits and cute references like ".. us smoothskins ..", I had to look it up:
https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Smoothskin
Thank you so much, @LWSS (the author)!
What the fuck? This is so weird.
I also had a chuckle when I saw the license
In a few days when valve lawyers knock on the door... he guys I said ALL DUE RESPECT, so its legal, its in the Geneva convention!!! https://youtu.be/Af-Id_fuXFA
You could dev a PC AAA game and released it only for elf/linux. It is so easy to install free mainstream elf/linux distros, ppl will probably do it to play that big PC AAA game.
Not sure if that will be possible after the move to CS2. You would think so, but at the very least, "Kisak-Strike: Gentoo Offensive" will exist.
idtech still towers over the source engine for any real "small" projects. The community support + license + codebase is just so much better.
The only reason to use source is if you are a superfan who wants to make derivative stinky cut-content projects, and VR ports. Otherwise, you're just enslaving yourself to the valve megacorp(unless you can afford an apex-style deal).
idtech... 4 ? How badly do you hate your job that you agree to put up with this piece of shit ? Even pulling out Godot would be less crappy and have more support than an engine targeting DX9 and OpenGL released in 2002. idtech 4 is barely better than _goldsrc_. Some things ought to die, and idtech 4 is better suited to a museum than any real game these days. The lack of any useful and modern tools should already be a screaming red flag.
It just looks so hacky and something from the early 2000s era when it comes to engine architecture... What am I missing? Shouldn't these guys be at the forefront of innovation when it comes to engine design? Last time I checked they were a multi-billion dollar company which prides in hiring only the best of the best. How the hell do the best of the best write this code where you find // HACK: everywhere?