With VB 3.5 released for so many month now...

[Borgs8472]

I think now would be an appropriate time to drop the 'you must have asked hack authors for their permission to port their hacks rule'

I worry it's preventing smaller mods, e.g. nested quotes for 3.5 (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showthread.php?t=94026) being properly released where they can be easily found.

Maybe a minor change in policy now?

[Brad]

It's not a rule, it's a matter of copyrights.

[TruthElixirX]

I thought the consenus on here was though you can't even make a hack like that from scratch. That here copying ideas was wrong. I think we shouldd be allowed to perhaps "recreate" hacks from odler versions if we custom code it. Telling us we can't use an idea fro mthe past with out the author's permission is ridiculous, IMO.

[Paul M]

Idea's are not copyright, only code. There is nothing to stop you 'porting' a hack if you rewrite it yourself.

[Tony G]

Although you'll always get the accusations you 'stole' code from the other mod since they might be similar. Well, it is the same mod after all, some things will be very similar in code.

[MRGTB]

Although you'll always get the accusations you 'stole' code from the other mod since they might be similar. Well, it is the same mod after all, some things will be very similar in code.

The thing is though, there are only so many hacks you can create that look totally different from another, after a while when there are many hacks, like you have here covering things from different angles and ways of doing things. It becomes more of less impossible to create a new hack, were somewhere on this board another hack could be said to have the same "this and that" bit of code in it.

[Code Monkey]

Although you'll always get the accusations you 'stole' code from the other mod since they might be similar. Well, it is the same mod after all, some things will be very similar in code.

If the other was around to accuse then they would be around to update their modification to 3.5x. ;)

[tehste]

I cant believe the level of ignorance towards intellectual property sometimes. Maybe you haven't considered the ethics of it or you choose to ignore them. Even if the author had vanished for 6 months it is wrong to take their code. Today I had giologist pm me and basicly say if I didn't port my gift addon for ushop he would "get it ported". I wasn't going to say anything but then I saw this thread and a few other requests by people to "port" hacks made by other people.

If this was open source it would be ok. But vb.org isn't open source.

[Andrew]

I cant believe the level of ignorance towards intellectual property sometimes. Maybe you haven't considered the ethics of it or you choose to ignore them. Even if the author had vanished for 6 months it is wrong to take their code. Today I had giologist pm me and basicly say if I didn't port my gift addon for ushop he would "get it ported". I wasn't going to say anything but then I saw this thread and a few other requests by people to "port" hacks made by other people.

If this was open source it would be ok. But vb.org isn't open source.
I think Giologist is perfectly legit if he has a hack ported over for his own personal use. However, if he turned around and released it here on vB.org as his own code a problem would arise.

[Tony G]

I think Giologist is perfectly legit if he has a hack ported over for his own personal use. However, if he turned around and released it here on vB.org as his own code a problem would arise.

Well, that's a tricky situation. You're still basically 'stealing' the code for your personal use, but as you said, not much harm as long as it's not shared code.

[Xenon]

Well, the code is releases for the purpose of personal use, and personal use includes appliing changes to it, but it doesn't allow rereleases.

of course ideas cannot be copyrighted normally, but it's still a matter of "good behaviour" not to directly copy an idea.

[harmor19]

I will not look through vb2 or vb3 hacks and port them out of respect.
The only exception I would make is that the author isn't active anymore.

I would start the hack from scratch (maybe look at the vb2 or vb3 hack to figure out an algorithm) but not go change it line by line and making it compatible with vb3.5

[Reeve of shinra]

Thats why I think we need this:
https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showthread.php?t=105357

[tehste]

i think what we need is members to understand the licensing of IP (intel. property). There is nothing to stop us using a GPL with hacks. So hack authors should release their hacks under any license they see fit. I personally don't want to release any of my code as open source. My hacks usually include license information in the readme: Even if it is as simple as: no modifications unless I ok them.
It's a clear statement and there is no room for interpritation. One of my hacks was being 'ported' without my permision. The readme contained an equivalent to that statement. And members complained when I said to the coder that what he is doing is wrong. Respect IP and the license that IP is provided by.

If I subscribed to an open source project I wouldn't be as possessive over code. But creating addons takes time and people who use find/replace to port an addon won't do it properly.

[Borgs8472]

Maybe I was too specific. I'd like to see people make 3.5 versions of 3.0 hacks without having to ask any permissions, even if the product looks/acts the same.

[Brad]

If you rewrite the code yourself then you do not have to ask for permission from the original author. However it's always preferred that you ask the author, especially if their hack inspired you to write your own.

I for one have allowed anyone that asks to port/translate anything I have released over the years. I know most all off my releases are small things, but I'm always happy to pass the project on to someone that wants to take it over.

To be honest once I release something I consider it done unless there is a large bug in it. I don't spend too much time on any one thing...it's the problem that has caused me to end many projects before they were finished. ;)

[Om3R]

Nice :d :d :d :d

[Borgs8472]

If you rewrite the code yourself then you do not have to ask for permission from the original author. However it's always preferred that you ask the author, especially if their hack inspired you to write your own.

I for one have allowed anyone that asks to port/translate anything I have released over the years. I know most all off my releases are small things, but I'm always happy to pass the project on to someone that wants to take it over.

To be honest once I release something I consider it done unless there is a large bug in it. I don't spend too much time on any one thing...it's the problem that has caused me to end many projects before they were finished. ;)
Fair enough. However the 'post in the origonal hack thread to get it ported' rules is a hinderance in that case, because no one will port other people's stuff in most cases.

[Chris M]

Fair enough. However the 'post in the origonal hack thread to get it ported' rules is a hinderance in that case, because no one will port other people's stuff in most cases.

That is to make the author aware that people want it ported to 3.5 ;)

Chris

[Borgs8472]

^ ^
yes, but sometimes the author's left the forum.

By the way, this thread is influenced by the 'public display of reputation' and 'reputation tracker' mods I heavily used, in both cases the coders were AWOL and I got them done on paid request.

There's a public 'public display of affection' hack out finally now, but not the other one, asking a non existant coder to port their hack is a very bureucratic and ineffective way of getting a port IMO.

[filburt1]

Om3R,

You are currently showing up as unlicensed. To be able to download hacks and/or receive support here at vBulletin.org, we ask you to please click here (http://members.vbulletin.com/membersupport_priority.php) (vB-germany users click here (http://members.vbulletin-germany.com/membersupport_priority.php)) and enter your email address, to show us that you are licensed.

You will need to use your customer number and password (which will be in the email you got when you paid for your license) to access that page. Please note that your email is case sensitive. The update of your account may take up to one hour.

Thank you.

[DrewM]

to tell the truth I think it's alot easyer to pm the author and gety there permission because they are normally fine with some one porting a hack over.

[Paul M]

Again, that assumes the Author is still around and visiting vb.org - in some cases they have not been here for months (or more).

[Smiry Kin's]

in that case PM the author stating what your doing.. post it, if then he says no etc. request a mod to remove it..

[Borgs8472]

^ ^
What If all I want to do is make a modifications request thread to gather support? Under the current system I shouldn't, I should post in the origonal hack thread...

[Gio~Logist]

I cant believe the level of ignorance towards intellectual property sometimes. Maybe you haven't considered the ethics of it or you choose to ignore them. Even if the author had vanished for 6 months it is wrong to take their code. Today I had giologist pm me and basicly say if I didn't port my gift addon for ushop he would "get it ported". I wasn't going to say anything but then I saw this thread and a few other requests by people to "port" hacks made by other people.

If this was open source it would be ok. But vb.org isn't open source.

Perhaps lack of communication goes a long way?

I PMed you saying that on behalf of Revan, he said that he will recode it and release it. Recode it meaning code it himself, not using your codes at all. If you would like me to post the conversation just let me know. However, your attempt at slander was not a good one at all due to the fact that not once did Revan or I say that we were going to port your hack using your code and release it. And if i or Revan decide to port your hack as appose to release our own version, it will only be for personal use, which is 100% legal.

Thank you,
Giovanni Martinez