What version of OpenAL does LE 2 use?

[Mumbles]

Strange question here, but I was looking at extending the sound capabilities beyond the limit that LE 2 will allow. Specifically I was interested in two things. Firstly (and more so) capturing from a microphone and secondly (less so) the ability export sound as heard by the listener to a file on the hard drive. The second I believe is possible, and would almost certainly require OAL, and the first would definitely be possible, removing the need for multiple sound libraries if I could implement them both.

 

So I set to work digging out some OpenAL tutorials and it doesn't seem too difficult (yet), but then I stopped because I'd noticed that version 1.1 and newer is not an LGPL license, it's a proprietary license. The odd thing is though, that I can't actually find the terms of this proprietary license anywhere. The redistributable package seems absolutely fine, but some reading around the Internet has confused me to no end. I get the impression that the SDK license is different and possibly even very restrictive. Worse, everything I've read, no two people can agree on what it is exactly. One thing I read even went as far as saying:

 

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/472878-is-openal-dead/page__p__4105525#entry4105525

* You cant distribute binaries of OpenAL

* You must support only Creative cards

* You must contact a distributer from Creative to distribute your program

* You cant modify OpenAL except for the source of the examples included

* You cant even write an engine that supports OpenAL and license it, they wont accept that

 

The third and fifth points really stood out to me, but just like any other view on the subject of their license, I couldn't find that repeated (or even implied) anywhere else to verify it. It's the sort of thing Brent Taylor would know really, except that I almost always seem to start arguing with him ...

 

 

I eventually figured out, LE 2 doesn't seem to have Creative Labs complaining about the license being violated, so if it uses the 1.1 SDK, it's probably alright for me to use it as well, but if it uses an older version, then which one, and where would I find it?

[Canardia]

I didn't find any of those EULA sentences on the official Creative site, must be fake.

[Josh]

I wouldn't worry about that, considering how many games use it.

[Pixel Perfect]

The wikipedia states:

 

Since 1.1, the implementation by Creative has turned proprietary, with the last releases in free licenses still accessible through the project's subversion. However, OpenAL Soft is a widespread open source alternative.

 

This question and response from Creative throws some light on the matter (ref: Creative OpenAL EULA). I assume the questioner being named Josh is pure coincidence:

 

Thanks for the question Josh.

 

That EULA is for the OpenAL SDK from Creative and has legal restrictions on

redistribution. Even though its accessible to the public we still like to

limit its redistribution and make sure that people agree to our EULA from

our website.

 

For your game all you need is the openAL installer

http://developer.creative.com/articles/article.asp?cat=1&sbcat=31&top=38&aid=46

 

That is under different legal terms that allow you to redistribute the

files you need for OpenAL.

 

thanks Josh

 

 

Liam Byrne

Developer Relations Manager Games

lbyrne at creativelabs.com

 

 

Notice

The information in this message is confidential and may be legally

privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this

message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended

recipient, any disclosure, copying or distribution of the message, or

any action taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be

unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please delete it

and contact the sender immediately. Thank you.

 

 

openal-bounces at opensource.creative.com wrote on 02/22/2007 08:35:22 PM:

 

> Hi all,

>

> I would just like to clarify a clause in the Creative EULA means:

>

> Creative grants to Licensee a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited,

> royalty-free license to use the Software solely in accordance with the

terms

> contained in this Agreement provided that:

>

> a. Licensee shall use the Software solely for the purpose of developing

> Licensee applications compatible with Creative’s products, unless

otherwise

> agreed to by further written agreement from Creative.

> b. the Software is not distributed without execution of a separate

> distribution agreement between Creative and Licensee;

> c. the Software may NOT be modified except for the source code examples

> found under the “Samples” directory; and

> d. Creative's BBS and FTP websites are the only on-line sites where

Licensee

> may download electronic files containing the Software.

>

> My question lies with item "B", Does this mean that we cannot distribute

the

> program we make unless we have an agreement with creative? or just that

we

> arn't allowed to distribute the SDK?

>

> So does that mean that I can commercially use OpenAL SDK from Creative?

ie..

> link to OpenAL in my program and distribute my program however I please?

> (GPL and LGPL always scare me)

>

> Thanks

>

> --Josh

 

[Canardia]

I would assume that if some uses the term "Open" in their product, it's open source and free. If they don't they are committing a crime and are illegal.

[Mumbles]

I think I'm starting to understand this now. Is it basically saying that you are free to link the code into your project, but that only Creative can modify the OpenAL source code, and that the SDK files (whilst being free) can only be downloaded via Creative's website?

 

If so, that sounds like the sort of license I'd like, I just it wasn't written in legalese (and also wasn't so hard to find)...

[Canardia]

I'd say listen to Jesus. He had the ability to form words with so much love, that it's incredible.