scyBorg Triple License — Why Three Licenses for Three Artifact Types
AGPL-3.0-or-later for code, ORC for game mechanics, CC-BY-SA 4.0 for documentation. Why each exists, what each protects, and why all three matter.
The Problem a Single License Cannot Solve
Software projects produce three orthogonal kinds of artifacts:
- Code — source files, shaders, build scripts, tests, binaries
- Mechanics — system designs, interaction rules, composition patterns, routing logic, graph structures, progression systems, encounter math
- Creative and scientific content — documentation, papers, diagrams, art, narrative, maps, sound
These are orthogonal dimensions — every piece of work has all three. A deploy graph is code (TOML syntax), mechanics (composition rules), and documentation (the reasoning behind the design). A WGSL shader is code (the source), mechanics (the mathematical model), and documentation (the comments and papers describing the physics). No single license covers all three well.
The GPL covers code but doesn’t address system designs. Creative Commons covers documentation but isn’t designed for source code. ORC covers mechanics but not software.
If you only use one license, there’s a gap — and that gap is where enclosure happens. A company can take your open code, wrap proprietary system designs around it, and sell a closed product. Or take your open science papers, reimplement in proprietary code, and lock the implementation behind a paywall.
scyBorg closes every gap.
The Three Licenses
AGPL-3.0-or-later — Code
Covers: Rust source, WGSL shaders, build scripts, configuration files, tests, experiments, tools, binaries.
Enforced by: Free Software Foundation (nonprofit, independent).
What it means:
- Anyone can use, modify, and distribute the code
- Derivatives must also be AGPL-3.0-or-later
- Network use triggers distribution: if you run ecoPrimals code as a service (SaaS), you must release your source code to users of that service
- This prevents the “open core” model where a company takes open code, adds proprietary features, and sells cloud access without releasing modifications
Why AGPL, not MIT or Apache? MIT and Apache allow proprietary closure. A company can fork MIT code, add features, and never release the changes. AGPL prevents this — every modification remains open. The network-use clause specifically addresses cloud providers who would otherwise wrap open code in a proprietary API.
Applies to all three organizations: ecoPrimals (primals), syntheticChemistry (springs), sporeGarden (products).
ORC — System Mechanics
Covers: System designs, interaction rules, composition patterns, capability routing logic, deploy graph structures, progression systems, stat blocks, encounter math, orchestration patterns.
Enforced by: Open RPG Creative Foundation (nonprofit, independent).
What it means:
- Mechanics published under ORC are irrevocably and perpetually open
- Anyone can use, modify, and build upon them
- Derivatives must also be ORC-licensed
- The licensor cannot revoke ORC — it is permanent
Why ORC? The obvious case is ludoSpring — game science, encounter balance, progression curves, HCI metrics. esotericWebb composes primals into a CRPG. These produce game mechanics that are as much intellectual work as the code.
The non-obvious case is everything else. Squirrel’s AI orchestration patterns — how models are routed, how providers fall back, how context windows are managed — are system mechanics. biomeOS’s Neural API routing rules (124 semantic capability translations) are mechanics. Deploy graph TOML structures that define how primals compose are mechanics. The NUCLEUS atomics ladder (Tower → Node → Nest) is a mechanical design. The Dark Forest protocol’s beacon structure is a mechanical design.
Without ORC, someone could study these interaction patterns, extract the system design, and build a proprietary orchestration product around ecoPrimals’ architecture without sharing the design back. AGPL protects the code that implements the design. ORC protects the design itself.
ORC was created in response to Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast’s 2023 attempt to revoke the Open Gaming License (OGL). The ORC is designed to be irrevocable by design — no single entity can pull it back. This aligns with ecoPrimals’ structural guarantee: no single entity controls the commons.
Applies to all three organizations: every system design, interaction pattern, composition rule, and mechanical structure across ecoPrimals, syntheticChemistry, and sporeGarden.
CC-BY-SA 4.0 — Documentation and Creative Content
Covers: All documentation, papers, diagrams, scientific writing, tutorials, art, narrative, maps, sound, videos.
Enforced by: Creative Commons (nonprofit, independent).
What it means:
- BY (Attribution): you must credit the original creator
- SA (ShareAlike): derivatives must use the same or compatible license
- Anyone can use, remix, and redistribute the content
- Commercial use is allowed — as long as attribution and share-alike are maintained
Why CC-BY-SA, not CC-BY or CC0? CC-BY allows proprietary derivatives without share-alike — a publisher could take ecoPrimals documentation, modify it, and release a proprietary version without sharing changes. CC0 waives all rights, including attribution — the creator gets no credit. CC-BY-SA balances openness (anyone can use it) with protection (derivatives must also be open and attributed).
Applies to all three organizations: every README, paper, guide, architecture document, and this website (sporePrint).
Why Three Independent Nonprofits
| License | Governing Body | Can the creator revoke it? | Can a corporation acquire it? |
|---|---|---|---|
| AGPL-3.0-or-later | Free Software Foundation | No | No |
| ORC | Open RPG Creative Foundation | No | No |
| CC-BY-SA 4.0 | Creative Commons | No | No |
Each license is governed by a different independent nonprofit. No single entity — including the ecoPrimals creator — can revoke any of the three licenses. This is structural, not contractual. Even if the creator wanted to close the project, the published code (AGPL), mechanics (ORC), and documentation (CC-BY-SA) remain permanently open under their respective licenses.
This matters because corporate open-source projects regularly change licensing terms. Redis switched from BSD to dual-license. Elastic moved from Apache to SSPL. HashiCorp moved from MPL to BSL. In each case, a single entity controlled the license and changed it when the business model demanded it. scyBorg makes this structurally impossible.
How It Applies Across the Ecosystem
All three licenses apply to all three organizations. They are orthogonal — each covers a different dimension of the same work, not a different subset of projects.
| Organization | What It Produces | AGPL (code) | ORC (mechanics) | CC-BY-SA (docs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ecoPrimals | Primals (infrastructure) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| syntheticChemistry | Springs (validation) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| sporeGarden | Products (compositions) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
The obvious ORC case: ludoSpring game rules, esotericWebb CRPG mechanics.
The non-obvious ORC cases:
- Squirrel — AI routing patterns, provider fallback chains, context window management rules
- biomeOS — Neural API routing (124 translations), deploy graph structures, NUCLEUS atomics composition rules
- barraCuda — precision tiering strategy (f32 → DF64 → f64 → QF128), the mechanical design of how math is routed to hardware
- Songbird — 4-tier NAT traversal strategy, BirdSong discovery protocol structure
- Every primal — IPC interaction patterns, capability registration rules, the mechanical design of how primals discover and compose with each other
Machine-Verifiable Enforcement
scyBorg is not just a policy — it is machine-verifiable through the Provenance Trio:
- sweetGrass — tracks who created what (the BY in CC-BY-SA)
- rhizoCrypt — tracks derivation chains (the SA in CC-BY-SA)
- loamSpine — stores immutable license certificates (proof that terms apply)
Together, they make scyBorg auditable. Without them, scyBorg is declarative (repository metadata and LICENSE files). With them, it is evidentiary — a cryptographic chain from creation to derivative.
What This Means for You
If you’re a researcher: use the code, run the experiments, publish the results. Attribution via CC-BY-SA. Your modifications to code stay open via AGPL.
If you’re a student: everything is free. Clone, build, learn, modify. If you publish modifications, they stay open — but your private experiments are yours.
If you’re a company: you can use ecoPrimals internally. If you distribute modified code or offer it as a service, you must release your modifications under AGPL. If you build game mechanics on ORC content, your mechanics are also ORC. If you derive from documentation, you attribute and share alike.
If you’re an AI training pipeline: code ingested under AGPL means generated outputs derived from that code carry AGPL obligations. This is the structural guarantee that AI cannot be used to launder open-source code into proprietary output.
Related
- Knowledge Commons — what’s already in the commons and what others can build
- Glossary — plain-language definition of scyBorg and other terms
- AGPL-3.0 full text
- ORC License full text
- CC-BY-SA 4.0 full text