*(see above)

If you can use something "in any way," you can sell it.  You can build the code into one of your own projects with a different name, and sell it.  I think that's the contradiction Nanaki was mentioning.

Looking back through the thread, people have been taking the fact that this was turned into a commercial product into account throughout the entire thing.  After all, that's what makes claiming someone else's creation as your own illegal, and worse than just acting like a dick.

As fate would have it, my post, the 11th post in the thread, specifically said: "Wow, that's really sad that someone released their source code for free and then someone else decided to package it as their own creation... and then sell it on the app store. Hopefully Apple will fix this quickly.

To which NanakiXI responded:

End of confusion?

Havent there been a few blatant ripoff games on the iphone already?

Duckhunt comes to mind.

Surely there should be some sort of control in place to prevent games like this from being uploaded?

I can't believe it is so incredibly blatant, and they initially claimed it as their own! If it is posted on the AppStore again, I hope that it is as flOw and thatgamecompany get royalties

Im not about to go quote hunting, but there were ALOT of posts complaining solely because he copied it. You can argue me on semantics but I think it was clear what I was saying when you read all of my posts: there was nothing legally wrong with them copying the game. That didn't violate the rules of open source, which I said. The only issue was when they sold it, which does violate the rules.

I'm just saying, read the comments you're criticizing next time.

And generally, make insulting statements if you want an argument, isn't that usually how it works? You started out insulting the creator of the original game, and then went on to vaguely insult your fellow posters in this thread. And I think you do need to get into semantics if you want to make yourself understood, at least in this case. Your first post says:

"To everyone suggesting that he sue, good look @ that. He released it as open source. Do you guys not understand the concept of open source."

And then a few posts later, you start insisting that selling the product WOULD be illegal, and give the original creator grounds to sue. I don't know if you were backtracking or what, and I don't care, but you can see how that would be confusing to your fellow forum dwellers, right?

By the way guys, this seems to have had a (somewhat) happy ending:

(from G4)

The flOw Clone Controversy Is Over


thatgamecompany co-founder Jenova Chen recently released the source code for his surreal PlayStation Network and PSP release, flOw, to encourage Flash development. He didn't expect someone would note-for-note reproduce flOw with the code and pretend its their own. This happened with Aquatica.

On the official website, Aquatica developer Ketara Software didn't bother to even mention flOw. Now, it does. When I contacted the developer, Ketara founder Oleg Samus was immediately apologetic, acknowledging Aquatica was very much influenced by Chen's creation.

"Our idea was to adapt [flOw] for the iPhone," explained Samus. "We apologize for initially not giving proper credit - we did not think it was necessary since all the graphics and source code were done by us (please note that we did not use a single line from the code released by Jenova, since we weren't aware it was released, and wanted to write a system like this ourselves)."

Samus has since posted "large samples" of Aquatica's source code for scrutiny, if people are still suspicious. The iTunes page, Aquatica's website and YouTube channel have all been updated with proper credit to flOw, as well.

"In general, we did not expect a reaction that followed," said a sincerely-sounding Samus, "and definitely did not intend to offend anyone at all."

Even Chen agrees with Samus, despite being initially upset about the situation.

"Personally I'm glad that they did have a quick reaction and changed the description for the game," said Chen in an e-mail to me.  "I don't want to make this thing a big deal. (which unfortunately has been) After all it is some one who really loved the flOw game and wanted to practice programming for iPhone. Now that he apologized, I just wish everybody go easy on this."

And that, as they say, is that.

Read more: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/696863/The-flOw-Clone-Controversy-Is-Over.html#ixzz0Jeby2wXa&C

I am only bumbing this thread because this needs to be read by a couple people (namely one person ;)   ) and maybe a couple more comments by some others who posted. I'm glad that it came to this conclusion and there was no real damage done. As I think it would have been foolish for lawsuits to go back and forth between the two. They handled this like real gentlemen and other companies (especially Activison and EA for Brutal Legend) could learn a lesson or two from this.

Thank God they have sense and didn't sue like half the people who find every little reason to sue over anything. Kudos!