Hello Guest

So, can we? Or can't we?

  • 9 Replies
  • 9335 Views
So, can we? Or can't we?
« on: January 10, 2006, 19:54:19 »
Ok, I've gotta find something I can do here. My games are all around 5 to 8 megabytes in size. After adding the Sun JVM however, they become 20 to 25 megabytes in size (and thats only because I use heavy compression). So, really, can we cut out the parts of the JVM we don't use? Or do we honestly have to leave the JVM as is in order to comply with Sun's licensing terms?
=-=-=-=-=-======-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.tommytwisters.com

So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2006, 19:58:41 »
Drats, just found a previous post that answered my question (both times.  :P )
=-=-=-=-=-======-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.tommytwisters.com

*

Offline elias

  • *****
  • 899
    • http://oddlabs.com
So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2006, 09:00:25 »
Are you using 7zip to compress your game? I found that the difference between TT without the JVM and TT with the JVM was around 10 megs. YMMV, of course.

 - elias

So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2006, 16:07:34 »
I am using 7zip, and it adds about 15mb to the package for me (although I know there are a few things I can still take out of the JVM according to the license in order to widdle it down to 10mb). The problem is, my games are only like 5 to 8 mb, so the JVM is sometimes tripling the size of my distribution, and I'm the one paying for the bandwidth on downloads. :(

I've been looking at different options, although I really like some of the advantages that Java offers (not having to compile to system specific optimizations is one BIG one).
=-=-=-=-=-======-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.tommytwisters.com

*

Offline princec

  • *****
  • 1929
    • Puppygames
So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #4 on: January 11, 2006, 18:33:19 »
Technically and possibly legally no you can't do this.

But you can, if you try ;)

Firstly try removing awt.dll and see if your game still runs. From there it's a matter of just removing everything you can and the game still running...

... then buy Molebox and hide all your naughtiness away and no-one need be any the wiser.

Cas :)

So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2006, 18:56:28 »
I'd love to do that... but being in the USA, litigation is always just one door down.  :P
=-=-=-=-=-======-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.tommytwisters.com

*

Offline Matzon

  • *****
  • 2242
So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2006, 21:32:52 »
funny AND sad at the same time :/

So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2006, 21:09:18 »
Check out the "Java Internal Use License (JIUL)" for this, there may be some room to wiggle here.  It's intended (IMO) to allow fixing a bug in a JVM and distributing that JVM if all parties are signatories of the JIUL.  

IANAL, nor do I ever want to be one :)

Bill
the2bears - the indie shmup blog

*

Offline princec

  • *****
  • 1929
    • Puppygames
So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2006, 22:41:20 »
Sadly the wording about the JIUL pretty much explicitly forgoes what we want to do here.

But Molebox on the other hand pretty much hides all the evidence in a way which might be very difficult to circumvent under the DCMA :D

Cas :)

So, can we? Or can't we?
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2006, 22:14:22 »
So... you'd be violating a license, but it couldn't be discovered without breaking a law...

Interesting way to abuse the system  :P