Super Grateful Bros - The Game That Tests Your Gratitude!
While I was on vacation, I decided to code my own first Bash shell script. I coded a Super Mario Bros-like game where it constantly asks you what (else) you are grateful for...until you beat the game by answering ALL the times it asks you.
The key game concepts that it teaches you is consistent gratitude, patience, dealing with mundane tasks, taking a break when needed, and saving the princess at the very end . :P
Below is a "text-shot" of what the game currently looks like:
$ ./super-grateful-bros.sh
Super Grateful Bros
World 1-1
What are you thankful for? Writing this game.
What else are you thankful for? The challenge of this game.
What else are you thankful for? Making this program Free Software.
What else are you thankful for? Cleaning my apartment.
What else are you thankful for? Finding a lost picture of my BFF from
high school
World 1-2
What else are you thankful for? ^C
Well, you get the jist.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| super-grateful-bros.sh.tar | 10 KB |
Needs freedom: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
For your consideration: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.html
Okay, I'm guessing that 1) the GNU Disclaimer should be on the top of the Bash Script, and 2) The theme should be changed due to a Nintendo-related trademark issue or something. Am I correct?
Either way, I updated the shell script.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| super-grateful-bros.sh | 4.06 KB |
> Okay, I'm guessing that 1) the GNU Disclaimer should be on the top of the Bash Script
If you're GPL'ing it, then you need both the license notice at the top and a COPYING file containing the license. See here for details: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html
> 2) The theme should be changed due to a Nintendo-related trademark issue or something. Am I correct?
By changing "Mario" to something else you've modified the name exactly as much as "Super Tux Kart" does, so I think you're fine. You'll want to check with a lawyer, though, so that, when your game inevitably becomes one million times more popular than the original, the original creator doesn't go into a jealous rage and send Nintendo's goons after you. :)
Assuming you want to improve your Shell scripting skills, you will find attached a better (and portable, hence 'printf' instead of 'echo', which does not behave identically on all shells) implementation. The script additionally uses the next things to know about scripting: variables, tests (see 'man [') and expression evaluation (here only used to increment integer variables).
If you have any question about it, just ask. And if you want an exercise that does not require any command/directive absent from the current script, here is one: test with 'expr' (see 'man expr') whether the answer has less than four characters (for instance) and, if so, print a message. Here is a second exercise that requires changing (not only adding) code: if the answer is too short ask five additional times what the player is thankful for. Yes, I am a teacher... :-)
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| sgb.sh.gz | 665 bytes |
Your program/script doesn't have a LICENSE. Artistic works without license are free (public domain). But software without license is PROPRIETARY.
In a word. You released a PROPRIETARY software here...
But I'll not report this "Freedom Issue" since here is the Troll Hole.
Note: Go to the GPL page on gnu.org. There should be a "How-to" section at the end.
PS, I'd rather prefer a game named "Super Miser Bros."...
Even artistic works require a license to not be "All rights reserved". In all the countries that signed the Berne convention, i.e., almost the whole world.
According to Berne Convention, everything written gains copyright automatically.
So if someone wants to release something as public domain, s/he must first give up copyright, as required by the copyright law.
But what is also true is that "no license" does mean "public domain" for artistic works. See RMS's essay(s) for details.
"So if someone wants to release something as public domain, s/he must first give up copyright, as required by the copyright law."
But not every place lets this happen. International copyright is a difficult topic. It helps to think of it that, thanks to things like Berne, you don't one get one single solitary copyright from your home country but ~200 different ones in various countries around the world. Thanks to things like Berne you automatically get your U.S. copyright, your Canadian copyright, your German copyright, your Mexican copyright, your Chinese copyright, etc. It goes on and on. All separate. And so, in the U.S. it's pretty clear that someone can abandon their copyright. So that gets rid of 1 copyright. About 199 left to go. And not all other countries let people abandon them. Yes, they might have a way for something to enter into the public domain due to copyright expiration (because it'd old) but not by simply giving it up from the start. That's why, when Creative Commons was working on making CC0, they made it first an attempt to abandon copyright with a fallback of giving people a copyright license for places where that wouldn't work.
One example is Germany but there are others too. To make a quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain
"However, some countries make exceptions to this rule. A notorious case is Germany, which has had a bilateral treaty with the U.S. governing copyright since January 15, 1892. That treaty, which is still in effect, defined that a U.S. work was copyrighted in Germany according to German law irrespective of the work's copyright status in the U.S., and it did not contain a "rule of the shorter term". In one case, a German court therefore decided that a U.S. work that had fallen into the public domain in the U.S. was still copyrighted in Germany in 2003 in spite of §7(1) of the EU directive."
Thanks to this bilateral agreement. Separate from Berne. So Berne isn't the only think to worry about: Countries making individual treaties also present a problem.
So all those things you see where someone in the U.S. just said "this is public domain" or whatever are still copyrighted in Germany. (And in other countries too.)
This is why putting stuff into the public domain on a worldwide basis is so very hard. It is far, far easier to just accept that you have copyright and license it out than it is to try to fight it and get rid of it, and then ultimately failing when you can't get rid of all of your ~200 different copyrights.
> But what is also true is that "no license" does mean "public domain" for artistic works. See RMS's essay(s) for details.
Citation needed.
Here's my citation for why you're completely wrong: