ToME Wiki
The problem
ToME(and Angband and Moria) is currently under a very old and weird licence, known as the Moria licence, which usualy annoys distributions and such beacuse they cannot add ToME easily.
Yesterday, to my extreme susprise must I (Ed: DarkGod) say, Neil said something along the lines "Why don't we go GPL?".
For my part I am for it, and many of the major angband contributors gave their permision too.
So please all contributors put your name here under the correct category(for or against ;), if against please tell us why, maybe it can be worked out 
The list
For:
Against:
Chatter
Remuz: I am no contributor, but I ask my question anyway... how much from original angband/zangband is left in the codebase? Because of all the changes since PernAngband, this must be quite limited, at a guess, some of the main_* files, but not much more (just a guess, please correct me). If I am right, GPLing ToME would be much much easier. Oh, and Neil saying that line is suprising, indeed. :p
NeilStevens: I'm not sure if it matters "what's left" as long as the whole thing remained a derived work.
DarkGod: The info files, not existing anymore in their prvious forms are fine I guess. Much of the engine has been touched/recoded but still the basic parts look still quite common to angband ancestry. Hey actually, anybody up for a code review to see if something is from sombody that did not agree ? 
NeilStevens: Hey, I hate a lot of what the FSF says, but on the scale of licenses, the GNU GPL is above the Moria license with no question, to me.
As for the Angband and Moria side of the story, Here is a list of Angband and prior developers who have signed off, which also includes at least a couple people who have also contributed to PernAngband and ToME. Since that page was updated, Robert Koeneke has also come on board with it.
CosmicGerbil: Are module developers allowed to vote?
NeilStevens: Not really. This is a legal question of whether ToME contributors give permission for us to make the change. If you don't have contributions to the ToME sources (the C sources and whatever remnants from the C were ported straight across to lua), then legally you don't really get a say.
DarkGod: I would add that this is not a vote, we are asking people who contributed to the game if they agree to the GPL, obviously people who did not contribute can not say they agree or not
CosmicGerbil: OK then, thanks for telling me that
NerdanelVampire: I was just looking through the rumors.txt file (it's going to be a lot of work thematizing Tolkien out of it for my module) and noticed that some of the rumors were those that I had contributed a long time ago. So here I give my official permission to GPL those few rumors.
ZizzoTheInfinite: I can't say I've contributed much more than a few patches, but my name's in the credits, so just in case, I'm all for it.
RavenRed: No issues with going GPL from my side of the pond.
TheFury: Did you end up using my color coding?
DarkGod: yup, although the code supporting it is (obviously, since it's in lua) different
TheFury: Hmm... Ok, well to be on the safe side, I release my coding additions gpl or whatever I'm supposed to say, including the language removal patches that I did, and everything that I did for FuryBand.
IngeborgNorden: Since some of my items made it into the official a_info file for ToME 2, does that count as a contribution?
NeilStevens: Oh yes of course, you never know if we'll want to port them over to ToME 3.
IngeborgNorden: Thanks, Neil; I voted for GPL'ing ToME too. (As for porting my item creations, I also added a few genuine Tolkienian items to T-Plus: the horn 'Valaroma', Peregrin Took's cloak and chainmail, and Dernhelm's sword. If you want to include them in ToME 3, feel free!
ReenenLaurie: I have a question... When will you know you've got everything you need? Shouldn't it be quicker (simpler) to identify code of people who have not signed, and go through some trouble to get their approval? I can imagine that there is not a lot left who've still got to give their approval. (Whether it be here, or on the normal angband site)
FearofFours: I've only made a scant few minor alterations to the C codebase, but there were some, and a fair portion of the helpfiles too, which I would assume comes under the license? If that is indeed the case, there are quite a few contributors to that...
DarkGod: Hey hey hey FearofFours ! You're still around ? Groovy
ReenenLaurie: So, basically, as soon as everyone on the "credits" list is covered you can declare it GPL? Just add a preamble to the license and you're OK? Kinda... Dunno really. No idea how these licensing works.
NeilStevens: I don't understand what you mean about putting a preamble on the license. The idea is to delete the use of the Moria license and apply the GNU GPL instead.
ReenenLaurie: The preamble is something that should read about: "We believe the code is totally GPL'd, if someone objects then goto / email someplace" and then go on to say that the thing is GPL. I have no idea how the law works, but if you can prove that you've gone through a lot of trouble to ensure the code is GPLed then I'm pretty sure it counts for something. And how much can someone who made a change like +if ptr->mana != 0 have to say about that insert?
NerdanelVampire: Why not dual licence? That way code sharing would be possible between all Angband variants, even those that haven't yet been GPLed.
NeilStevens: Because going GNU GPL lets us use code that is incompatible with the Moria license, what with its discrimination of endeavor.
DarkGod: That and the fact that *bands code and T-Engine code are too far away now for any meaningful sharing to happen
AndreyEgoshin: I've only made some alterations(few minor patches) to the 2.x alchemy system (and may be something else I forgot to mention), so really you don't need my permission. But if you do - I agree. btw sorry for my english, I'm too tired now to properly translate my russian thoughts.
DarkGod: Given the answers we got on r.g.r.a it seems the best idea is to GPL the T-Engine but keep the ToME module under the Moria licence(even if we could gpl it), because the Moria licence with its no selling clause can "protect" us from the Tolkien Estate(if the game cannot provide money thye don't really seem to care).
Andrew Sidwell (takkaria): All my changes can be counted as GPL, though they were quite a while back now.
DarkGod: Ok, anybody feeling in a lawyer kind of mood? I'd like to add a special clause that allows modules to use a licence different of the GPL(obivously since ToME itself must stay under moria licence). Something along the lines of "Modules and other packages using the T-Engine must be released under an OSI-approved licence of the Moria licence". Oh and can we add a clause to the moria licence saying "and the source must be made available"? (Although it would be most hard to hide, being lua and all, but you never know)
ReenenLaurie: So there are still several parts of ToME that's not GPL?
DarkGod: Not really, but we think it's better to keep ToME licence as the moria one beucase it specificaly says "dont sell it", which seems to be fine with the Tolkien Estate. The T-Engine should be released as GPL though. Which is why I need special clauses
ReenenLaurie: Yes... Hehe, and apparently that clause wouldn't suit Novell so well. :-/
CosmicGerbil: Can I vote now I have contributed some music to ToME?
ReenenLaurie: I guess so, but I added to my musics (if you actually edit them and view the file internally) that they are GPL.
NeilStevens: Actualy you should re-license those. The GNU GPL doesn't work with music; it's specific to computer programs with source code.
CosmicGerbil: What should I do with my music then? I don't mind if anybody wants to use it in a different game, as long as they give me credit as the composer. Reenen did the arranging and converting for two of my tunes for me.
AerdanRunestar: I'd personally suggest using the Creative Commons licensing for music/audio/graphics/etc.
CosmicGerbil: Cool, thanks dude I will check it out.
NeilStevens: Just make sure you use one of the less-restrictive ones, preferably.
CosmicGerbil: Why are some of them restrictive?
NeilStevens: Yes, some have restrictions that would make them difficult to use with, say, GNU GPL-covered software, because they place restrictions like non-commercial or non-modifiable, I think.
AerdanRunestar: The non-commercial one shouldn't be a problem, since any music/graphics/etc going into the project will be for ToME, and thusly shouldn't be able to be used commercially.
CosmicGerbil: Non commercial is not a problem for me, cos I want all the stuff I do on the internet (e.g. games and music) to be free
AndrewSidwell: NonCommercial is incompatible with the GPL -- it means it can't be put on Linux distro CDs which may be shipped for money, amongst other things. The GPL allows things to be sold, basically, NonCommercial doesn't. I'd recommend Attribution-ShareAlike, which I think is the closest to the GPL in spirit.
NeilStevens: So it'd work for ToME, which will continue to use the non-commercial Moria license, with the catch that if anybody wanted to borrow the music for another module, the licensing might be a problem.
NerdanelVampire: I fixed the link from the forum. And while I'm at it, my modifications to ToME 3's non-baby module selection screen are officially GPL too, if there was ever any doubt.