ET ETL US!

[RNGesus]

I’ve provided you this. You can build yourself and confirm. However if your looking for memory loaded into your client via external means these are not covered by the gpl release hence why punkbuster wasn’t open sourced either. But my conversation with you and your crew comes to a close here. 

[TomekKromek]

No idea what “crew” you are talking about, but it is hard not to notice that you are very sensitive about certain topics — especially transparency.
 

When PunkBuster was used, ET had not been released under the GPLv3 license yet. Anyway, the binaries in the FA .pk3 are not created from the official ET: Legacy repo. I know that, you know that, and that is why I want the source code from the person running this server.
 

I should not even have to ask for it. It should have been provided at the same time the binaries were distributed.

[Vice86]

1 hour ago, RNGesus said:

But my conversation with you and your crew comes to a close here. 

Tomek simply wants to know what was wrong with the original files.

To understand this, he needs to ask.

I don't understand the point of your statement.

It's not always a "crew," but rather many individual people trying to work together.

That inherently includes a certain degree of transparency in that specific regard.

 

If you don't want to provide the source files for this, you don't have to, but it does raise questions when someone modifies an entire archive like that. You're perfectly entitled to say so. It wouldn't be ideal, but that's just how it is. A short changelog would be nice, though. It's perfectly understandable that this raises questions.

 

I also wonder what you/we as a clan can do better than the official release from the ETL community.

[Vice86]

3 hours ago, Vice86 said:

Tomek simply wants to know what was wrong with the original files.

To understand this, he needs to ask.

I don't understand the point of your statement.

It's not always a "crew," but rather many individual people trying to work together.

That inherently includes a certain degree of transparency in that specific regard.

 

If you don't want to provide the source files for this, you don't have to, but it does raise questions when someone modifies an entire archive like that. You're perfectly entitled to say so. It wouldn't be ideal, but that's just how it is. A short changelog would be nice, though. It's perfectly understandable that this raises questions.

 

I also wonder what you/we as a clan can do better than the official release from the ETL community.

Okay, so after talking to @RNGesus personally, before we continue this conversation here, 

 

there has been modifications made to our AC system which obviously can´t be shared with the public here. 

Edited April 27 by Vice86

[TomekKromek]

19 minutes ago, Vice86 said:

Okay, so after talking to @RNGesus personally, before we continue this conversation here, 

 

there has been modifications made to our AC system which obviously can´t be shared with the public here. 

All approved by DD according to rng.

 

So, they are violating the GPLv3 license after all?
 

Why did he try to convince me that FA was using the source code from the ETL GitHub repository, even though changes had been made and he knew about them?
 

Nice try. If I hadn’t been stubborn enough, I would have been lied to and misled. This was deliberate.

[RNGesus]

10 minutes ago, TomekKromek said:

 

So, they are violating the GPLv3 license after all?
 

Why did he try to convince me that FA was using the source code from the ETL GitHub repository, even though changes had been made and he knew about them?
 

Nice try. If I hadn’t been stubborn enough, I would have been lied to and misled. This was deliberate.

Once again I linked the snap of etl that server runs. My code exists outside of this. Not violating it. I’m under no obligation to share anything with you in this manner more than I did. But please email Zenimax that etpro isn’t open source n!tmod isn’t open source lets see how far that gets you. 

Edited April 27 by RNGesus

[TomekKromek]

Just now, RNGesus said:

Once again I linked the snap my code exists outside of this. Not violating it. I’m under no obligation to share anything with you in this manner more than I did. But please email Zenimax that etpro isn’t open source n!tmod isn’t open source lets see how far that gets you. 

 

ETPro and n!tmod were based on code released under a different license. You have no idea what you are talking about. Any changes made to ETL code that are distributed have to be open source.

Daredevil’s public post from 2018 about this exact matter:

[RNGesus]

16 minutes ago, TomekKromek said:

 

ETPro and n!tmod were based on code released under a different license. You have no idea what you are talking about. Any changes made to ETL code that are distributed have to be open source.

Daredevil’s public post from 2018 about this exact matter:

GPL applies to derivative works of the ETLegacy code. My anti-cheat runs as a separate service and isn’t derived from the engine. Also you get into grey area in several fields from release to etl, etl is derivative ect license still goes to zenimax as stated in the end. I’ve provided you that snap that is under GPL your answer to wanting what’s outside GPL is no regardless of how you feel. 

[TomekKromek]

I want the source code for the binaries available for download on ETL US. I don’t care about your separate anti-cheat. I want to see the changes made in the client binaries.
 

And if you want to suggest that there are no changes compared to the public builds, then why not use the binaries provided by ETL? So maybe revert to official legacy_v2.83.2?

[daredevil]

On 4/27/2026 at 2:47 AM, TomekKromek said:

@daredevil @JoeDirt @RainierWolfcastle

 

Hello Owners, could you please provide the corresponding source code for the version currently used on your server (ETL US), or point me to where it is available?

Thank you.

 

Hello,

 

1) From what I know, the legacy dev team is aware of this and okay with it, allowing RNG's approach. However, if they have any questions, please have them reach out to RNG directly or to me.

2) I don't see a license violation here, as RNG is not claiming ETL as his work. He's not modifying ETL, but rather packaging his own stuff within the same pk3/dll. Credits are in place, but, as I stated a few years back, I'm not a lawyer. The AC code is private, and it's up to RNG whether to share it or not. It would be foolish to share the AC code, as it could then be bypassed.

3) Currently, it's on ETL US and scrim 1 server. It's also part of TM, HBC, etc. servers. If you have reservations, I understand, but in that case, I would advise skipping the servers running these binaries. Thanks.