Regarding the vBHosting Hack

[Boofo]

Just to play devils advocate,... since it is a copyright violation for anyone to share the vbulletin code, don't you think that jelsoft could shut down a hack site if they felt that particular site was stretching the spirit of the agreement?

I think alot of people need to learn the value of compromising. When you draw a hard line in the sand then that forces the other party to take an equally hard stance... in the end thats unpleasant for everyone where-as a willingness to work with each other fosters harmony and help everyone reach thier mutal goals faster.

Very well said and I agree 100%. ;)

[Wayne Luke]

YOU INSULT OUR INTELLIGENCE.. Actually you insult your own intelligence and until such time as you can actually act as a Human Being, I reserve the right to totally disregard anything you say.

I am actually interested in working a way out so this hack is available...

[Wayne Luke]

Wait I just came up with an idea. Why not pass all hacks that are made from now on through vbulletin.com's staff so they can approve it before everyone else sees it that way nothing like this will EVER happen again. This could definately be a possibility. At the very least it would allow quality control.

[trafix]

This could definately be a possibility. At the very least it would allow quality control.
QA is one of the main things that we hopt to focus on at EVB once we finalise the details :)

[azher]

QA is one of the main things that we hopt to focus on at EVB once we finalise the details :)

lol. hi, you don't know me, but i found that amusing. and yes, i like shiny things. :)

going back to the topic, i don't see what all the fuss is about though i can't fault jelsoft for being overly cautious. i just hope that they come to their senses and realize the immense positives that can come from this hack not only for jelsoft but the site owners and communities everywhere that are proud to use vB.

[nighteyes]

lol. hi, you don't know me, but i found that amusing. and yes, i like shiny things. :)

going back to the topic, i don't see what all the fuss is about though i can't fault jelsoft for being overly cautious. i just hope that they come to their senses and realize the immense positives that can come from this hack not only for jelsoft but the site owners and communities everywhere that are proud to use vB.

Dream on. :)

[Boofo]

This could definately be a possibility. At the very least it would allow quality control.

That sounds like a great idea to me. Maybe they could fix all of my mistakes that I usually make in a hack BEFORE it is released and I could learn from them. ;)

[SONOFSAM]

*gets off topic*

Wow..I cant believe I just read all 18 pages. Its like reading a murder/mystery novel and getting to the end to find you dont get to know who killed the bulter.

I hope a compromise can be found without losing too much of the hack. Would love to use this hack as well.

[trafix]

Well the outcome is in Jelsofts hands :) As far as I can see they are trying to negotiate the best solution for everyone ....

SO to those who still want to protest ...

Build a bridge and get over it!

[Morrus]

This one line causes the vBHosting hack to break the license agreement.

Even if you don't think it breaks the letter of license agreement, it is certainly contrary to the spirit of the license agreement, which is one license for one board.

Kier, the whole point of licensing agreements is related to the letter of the agreement. That's why you have them. If you have a licensing agreement, you don't get to waffle on about nebulous "spirit" and such.

If Jelsoft don't want to be bound by and adhere to a licensing agreement, then they shouldn't create one.

I licensing agreement's raison d'etre is to make is plain and clear what the obligations of both parties are. That is what Jelsoft has chosen to do. Now Jelsoft doesn't get to complain about actions taken by people which are within the terms of the agreement: you certainly wouldn't be so lenient with people who violated the agreement - so what on earth makes you think that any other party to the agreement is going to be?

You have to realise that many of the licensees you deal with here are businesses, just like you. They don't enter into licensing agreements lightly, and they expect you to hold up your end. There are some big, big companies using vBulletin - you go to, say, Hasbro (which uses vBulletin, e.g. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=community/boards/welcome) and try to tell them that they can't do things permitted by the license because it's against the "sprit" of it and see what happens. These companies regularly enter into licensing agreements with the likes of LucasArts, Pokemon and such), and they take such things very, very seriously.

It's not even a moral issue here. Some of us run businesses just like you do; we make agreements with other businesses because it is in our long-term (financial) interests to do so. If the license had prohibited what you're implying you believe it prohibits, we would not have entered into those agreements, because it would not have been in our long-term interests. As it is, we have an agreement with you, and we fully expect Jelsoft to hold up its end of the agreement.

If you want to debate "community issues", morality and fairness, stop charging for the product and release free software. When you start taking money, you find yourself in a different league.

[jluerken]

Kier, the whole point of licensing agreements is related to the letter of the agreement. That's why you have them. If you have a licensing agreement, you don't get to waffle on about nebulous "spirit" and such.

If Jelsoft don't want to be bound by and adhere to a licensing agreement, then they shouldn't create one.

I licensing agreement's raison d'etre is to make is plain and clear what the obligations of both parties are. That is what Jelsoft has chosen to do. Now Jelsoft doesn't get to complain about actions taken by people which are within the terms of the agreement: you certainly wouldn't be so lenient with people who violated the agreement - so what on earth makes you think that any other party to the agreement is going to be?
18 pages? This is crazy.

Jelsoft should bring out an official statement and don't wait so long.
They have a license agreement and in my opinion the hack is not against it, so what?

[Morrus]

Actually, this is exactly what the hack does. It allows every person on a site running this to create their own sub-community with a unique look and feel, control over their members, multiple forums and so forth.


Wayne, this is where you're going wrong.

You're fixating on the issue of creating new "communities". However, that nebulous term is not part of the licensing agreement which everyone here read, agreed to and then paid for. Communities are irrelevant.

Your licensing agreement refers specifically to the software, and the distribution/leasing/sale thereof. The software is what has been licensed, and Jelsoft has very deliberately entered into a specific, binding agreement with those people who purchase such a license.

If licenses were flexible artifacts, where the licensors/licensees were able to enforce "spirit", interpret the terms how they chose and so forth, then the whole concept of licenses would break down. That's not what a license is, and that's not what it's for.

Everyone here expects you to enforce the license (according to the letter), and everyone here has no doubt that Jelsoft would not hesitate to do so were it to see someone actually violating that license. That's not a problem, and nobody is going to argue against that. But, the flip side of a licinsing situation, is that the licensee is going to do the same thing.

It seems to me that Jelsoft need to completely revise their licensing strategy so that it meets their aims more adequately. Right now, they are in the position where they have accepted money from people, and are bound specifically by the terms under which they accepted that money, in the same way that those people are bound specifically by the terms under which they purchased their licenses.

[GameCrash]

yeah.. but sadly they can keep you from getting your hands on it if they don't want it on their site(s)..
The hack will be published, if not here, than somewhere else. I just won't do that until it has been officially banned from vBulletin.org as I want to be sure that the one downloading the hack is a licensed vBulletin customer which I can't be anywhere else.

I know that hack is at least legal in Germany so it's no problem for me to release it...

[Zachery]

The hack will be published, if not here, than somewhere else. I just won't do that until it has been officially banned from vBulletin.org as I want to be sure that the one downloading the hack is a licensed vBulletin customer which I can't be anywhere else.

I know that hack is at least legal in Germany so it's no problem for me to release it...
No, vBulletin Germany didnt have the authorization to tell you it was legal, Kiers word is the final decision on it.

[Morrus]

No, vBulletin Germany didnt have the authorization to tell you it was legal, Kiers word is the final decision on it.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to say this again. Kier's word is not the final decision on anything. The most Jelsoft can do is issue an opinion as to what they believe is legal or not legal under their license, and then other parties can take whatever action they feel appropriate, depending on how confident they are of their own legal standing.

Any assertions otherwise indicate a very fundamental misunderstanding of how the law works in relation to licensing agreements. And someone who doesn't understand such things really shouldn't be dabbling in them (or should employ a lawyer who can handle it for them).

[Zachery]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to say this again. Kier's word is not the final decision on anything. The most Jelsoft can do is issue an opinion as to what they believe is legal or not legal under their license, and then other parties can take whatever action they feel appropriate, depending on how confident they are of their own legal standing.
If jelsoft bans a hack of this nature it would not be allowed to be distributed on any of the offical vBulletin / Jelsoft websites. It is Jelsofts final call on their own websites.

[Morrus]

If jelsoft bans a hack of this nature it would not be allowed to be distributed on any of the offical vBulletin / Jelsoft websites. It is Jelsofts final call on their own websites.

Ah, we have a communication issue.

I thought you were refering to use of the hack; in fact you were refering to distribution of it on Jelsoft's websites. In that case, we are in agreement,

[FASherman]

No, vBulletin Germany didnt have the authorization to tell you it was legal, Kiers word is the final decision on it.

Again, this is wrong. The only "final word" can come from a judge. That "final word" must be sought by Jelsoft. The burden of proof to receive that "final word" belongs to Jelsoft. Any area of ambiguity will be interpretted by the courts in favor of the the defendant, ie not Jelsoft. Should Jelsoft loose in court - which is likely - then they not only have pay their own legal costs, but also those of the defendant. Moreover, they face the prospect of civil suit damages far in excess of actual cost.

All the while, this issue will damage Jelsoft's reputation with other customers and potential customers. The performance/feature gap between Jelsoft and Invision is not so great that it makes doing business with a draconian company palatable. In fact, that is the largest reason why NFL teams like the Philadelphia Eagles and San Francisco 49ers chose IPB over VB.

Many thanks to Wayne for allowing us to view this hack first hand. Anyone who sees for themselves the complete lack of features available in the hack's Control Panel can see first hand how this is nowhere near a "sublicense".

[Morrus]

What Jelsoft need to do now is this (and this is what I'd be doing in their situation, because I agree that this hack is not good for them!):

1) Change the license now. At the very least, all new licensees will be bound by the new terms. Make sure you incorporate a defined concept of a "community" and the licensee's rights in sub-assigning such things. Make sure you include any restrictions you wish to include regarding how people can generate revenue using the software (at present, there is no restriction other than that of selling/distributing the software).

2) Make sure that anyone renewing a leased license agrees to the new terms upon renewal.

There will be a problem for them in that some people will be using the old license (either temporarily, in case of a leased licensed, or permanently in case of an owned license). But these measures will help.

I can't remember offhand the structure of the members area as connected with licenses, but access to the members area (and thus upgrades) is connected to a yearly renewal, is it not? That's another opportunity to change terms.

What will happen is that the majority of people, within a year or so, will be bound by the new terms. A select few with owned licenses will choose to stick with what they have (and forego upgrades and so forth); these people will probably be those comfortable with hacking their boards anyway, and to whom an upgrade would probably be more hassle than it's worth.

[PlenoJure]

While it seems the issue of distributing this hack has been setteled based on the last couple posts, I would still like a better explanation of just what that clause in the license represents. It seems there is a great deal of confusion, perhaps if Jelsoft released a somewhat more detailed statement it would help clear up the legel issues.

[Morrus]

While it seems the issue of distributing this hack has been setteled based on the last couple posts, I would still like a better explanation of just what that clause in the license represents. It seems there is a great deal of confusion, perhaps if Jelsoft released a somewhat more detailed statement it would help clear up the legel issues.

No, it would only help clear up Jelsoft's opinions. I'd happily release an (equally valid) opinion of what the clause means, but, frankly, that would also just be an opinion.

As FASHerman says, above, if Jelsoft wish to assert that it means something other than what I think it means, in a manner more than just saying "well, umm, this is what we think", they need to assert it according to proper legal process. In other words, they need to take action against someone using the hack; however, I wouldn't recommend to them that they do that, for reasons stated previously by various people. :)

[PlenoJure]

If jelsoft bans a hack of this nature it would not be allowed to be distributed on any of the offical vBulletin / Jelsoft websites. It is Jelsofts final call on their own websites.
There is two debates going on here, and it seems there is a fair amount on confusion about which everybody is talking about. There is the issue of if it's legel & if it will be distributed here.

Based on the comments made by Jelsoft reprsenitives obviously they have decieded about the distrobution issue. This is thier site, they chose what to allow and what not to, that simple. Even if it is someday found to be within the confines of the license they still have the right to not allow it, thats their chose, this is their site.

[nighteyes]

If jelsoft bans a hack of this nature it would not be allowed to be distributed on any of the offical vBulletin / Jelsoft websites. It is Jelsofts final call on their own websites.

So you are banning the hack, yes?

[lasto]

Well the outcome is in Jelsofts hands :) As far as I can see they are trying to negotiate the best solution for everyone ....

SO to those who still want to protest ...

Build a bridge and get over it!


Nope its not end of matter.
If we all took someones word at face value then we would never get anything sorted.This aint just about the hack it has deeper Issues for everyone who buys a vb license and how jelsoft controls what we are allowed to use.19 pages because one hack is removed goes to show that people are not happy with the situation.

Problem with vb is there is 2 diversions - the die hard vb fanatics who believe that anything said is solid and then you have those who are only interested in releasing hacks or helping others.
If the hack is allowed you would use it if u needed it would`nt you ? so all you lot saying waynes word is final it aint as GameCrash said if its banned here he will release it elsewhere and because of that the hack will be a sought after one just because Jelsoft decided to ban it in the first place.
Remember if we all roll over and die nothing would ever get sorted so sometimes people need to come together like this to clear the air.

[PlenoJure]

No, it would only help clear up Jelsoft's opinions. I'd happily release an (equally valid) opinion of what the clause means, but, frankly, that would also just be an opinion.

I run a small site and even if I was doing something that was later proved to be legal, a very short legal battle would destroy my company. I can't afford to get cought up in a legal fight over something like this, I would rather see their legal opinion and abide by that, then not know and accedently do something to get myself sued.

(BTW: No, I'm not running this hack, I'm just trying to get some answers for future refference)

[Morrus]

I run a small site and even if I was doing something that was later proved to be legal, a very short legal battle would destroy my company. I can't afford to get cought up in a legal fight over something like this, I would rather see their legal opinion and abide by that, then not know and accedently do something to get myself sued.

(BTW: No, I'm not running this hack, I'm just trying to get some answers for future refference)

I'm not using it, either. Just interested in the topic. :)

Anyway, I wouldn't recommend that a small business get involved in any legal tests (although Jelsoft aren't exactly a giant). Leave it to the bigger boys. It only takes one instance for the legal precedence to happen.

I don't think there's much danger of it happening, anyway. I'm pretty sure I know what Jelsoft will eventually say, although weirder things have happened...

[GameCrash]

No, vBulletin Germany didnt have the authorization to tell you it was legal, Kiers word is the final decision on it.


I am not talking about distribution, I am talking about legality
I am not talking about what either the Jelsoft staff or the Adduco staff sys, I am talking about laws
I had written permission from both, vB.com and vB-Germany.com - it's just the problem that I can't no more access this at vB.com as I don't have any license left there.
If Kier has any decision on what vB-Germany.com does with its customers and its licenses depends on the internal agreement between both. However, as a customer, internal agreements are irrelevant for me, the only relevant thing is what the ones I have a contract with say. This is (at least German) law.

[FASherman]

I run a small site and even if I was doing something that was later proved to be legal, a very short legal battle would destroy my company. I can't afford to get cought up in a legal fight over something like this, I would rather see their legal opinion and abide by that, then not know and accedently do something to get myself sued.

(BTW: No, I'm not running this hack, I'm just trying to get some answers for future refference)

Never let the fear of legal costs keep you from pursuing your rights. Take this situation, as an example. First, Jelsoft would have to file suit against you. As the defendent, you have certain legal rights. One is to be compensated for the cost of your defense if Jelsoft fails to make their case. Secondly, you are entitled to countersue for damages to your good name. Just making an accusation of software piracy is highly damaging to those of us in the IT industry, even if we prevail in court.

A good lawyer will see just how fragile Jelsoft's claim is and may agree to take the case on a contingency basis. That is, if you loose, you pay the lawyer nothing, but if you win, Jelsoft pays the legal fees, plus the lawyer gets 20-30% of the damage award from the countersuit.

This type of arrangement is much more common than you might believe.

[PlenoJure]

Anyway, I wouldn't recommend that a small business get involved in any legal tests (although Jelsoft aren't exactly a giant). Leave it to the bigger boys. It only takes one instance for the legal precedence to happen.
That's why I'm asking the questions now :)

[Morrus]

Incidentally, those who are having moral issues with this hack (as opposed to legal issues) should glance at this thread:

https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showthread.php?t=54327

It makes it clear that Jelsoft are willing to enforce license terms to the letter, even against someone harmlessly using a "test site". That's fine - it's their right, and it is clear in the license agreement that one cannot do that. But I don't see a moral quandry here should I find myself in a position where I might want to do something permitted by the license but which is against Jelsoft's interests.

Licenses work both ways. :)

[GameCrash]

I don't think this thread is the right place to post feature suggenstions ;)

By the way, I'm getting many mails and pms from people asking if I could send them a copy of vBHosting. Please stop this. I won't answer you. This won't change until either Jelsoft makes an official decision or if they don't do this until then, exactly one week after the original thread has been deleted.

[13th_Disciple]

I don't think this thread is the right place to post feature suggenstions ;)

By the way, I'm getting many mails and pms from people asking if I could send them a copy of vBHosting. Please stop this. I won't answer you. This won't change until either Jelsoft makes an official decision or if they don't do this until then, exactly one week after the original thread has been deleted.
glad to hear you will still make this available.. i am looking very forward to this hack once i upgrade to gold.. need for several hacks to come on out before my license expires in april.. after that, not sure if i will be back for another year long soap opera under the guise of license agreements..

[Reeve of shinra]

A good lawyer will see just how fragile Jelsoft's claim

If Jelsoft decided to sue for redistributing this hack, then could go after you for redistributing copyrighted code which the defendee wouldn't be able to defend. The amguity in the liscence regarding the context of this hack would never even be heard.

As for the Hasbro arguement... they would have bought a second or a third or even a tenth liscence. Thier corporate lawyers have a better understanding both the spirity and the letter of the agreement and for a multimillion dollar company, spending an extra $60 bucks or so for another liscence isnt even something to think about.

For that matter... Hasbro likely wouldn't want an administrator creating unlimited forums and changing the themes around and such, nor would I.

[Chris|vB]

I think its best to wait and see what Kier and everyone says. :) again.... or did they ?

[Morrus]

As for the Hasbro arguement... they would have bought a second or a third or even a tenth liscence. Thier corporate lawyers have a better understanding both the spirity and the letter of the agreement and for a multimillion dollar company, spending an extra $60 bucks or so for another liscence isnt even something to think about.

For that matter... Hasbro likely wouldn't want an administrator creating unlimited forums and changing the themes around and such, nor would I.

I think you missed my point. My point related to the concept of trying to enforce a license based on its "spirit", and how little effect that would have when dealing with anyone who knows what they are doing. Hasbro was just an example of someone Jelsoft wouldn't go to with their "spirit" argument, and my point is that if they wouldn't go to Hasbro with such an argument, then they shouldn't be going to Joe Smallsite with the argument.

[Floris]

I think you missed my point. My point related to the concept of trying to enforce a license based on its "spirit", and how little effect that would have when dealing with anyone who knows what they are doing. Hasbro was just an example of someone Jelsoft wouldn't go to with their "spirit" argument, and my point is that if they wouldn't go to Hasbro with such an argument, then they shouldn't be going to Joe Smallsite with the argument.
Originally Posted by Kier
This one line causes the vBHosting hack to break the license agreement.

Even if you don't think it breaks the letter of license agreement, it is certainly contrary to the spirit of the license agreement, which is one license for one board.

Just is the official statement made, and I'd stick with it and I don't see a reason to change it until a valid point is provided to correct his words. I think it is settled now and we can all go back to our daily life again.

[the Sandman]

One of the recurrent themes in this Thread is the notion that Jelsoft is not taking into account all of the ramifications of it's actions in regards to this vBHosting hack. I would be willing to wager that they have given the matter far more consideration than those who advocate circumventing Jelsoft's wishes - which could have a profound effect on the way future versions of vBulletin are developed, released, and supported. I for one give no credence to the assertion that Jelsoft is trying to prevent any reasonable use of it's software. Despite all manner of adversity, including the dDoS attacks, server crash with inadequate host support, and continual bombardment from the naysayers, vB3 is here in final form and is quite the accomplishment. Jelsoft is a business, a software development corporation - just because they are accessable and responsive to their customers doesn't mean they are your buddies - they do what they do to be able to continue to provide the vBulletin we all want.

[Morrus]

Jelsoft is a business, a software development corporation - just because they are accessable and responsive to their customers doesn't mean they are your buddies - they do what they do to be able to continue to provide the vBulletin we all want.

Sure, I agree completely. And we do what we need to do to continue to provide our own websites, even if those actions are not in Jelsoft's interests. Our own communities come first.

Jelsoft needs to look after its own interests, of course. We have to look after our own interests. That's the nature of doing business, unfriendly though it sounds.

[Dark Shogun]

Ok Wayne Luke or Kier throw the cards on the table. Which of these are you saying?

1. This hack (as it is currently) isn't allowed to be downloaded here.

OR

2. This hack (as it is currently) isn't allowed to be downloaded here AND can't be installed on any board.

Dark Shogun

[SpeedStreet]

Just is the official statement made, and I'd stick with it and I don't see a reason to change it until a valid point is provided to correct his words. I think it is settled now and we can all go back to our daily life again.
I believe my post shortly after Kier made his statement completely refutes his claim.

Look, we can go on about this round and round.

#1 Having vB Staff approval for all hacks would doom this product.
#2 Jelsoft has agreed to work out a comprimise on this hack. If the author is unwilling, then he is as guilty as Jelsoft for thinking it was a good idea to just ban this hack outright in the first place. Drawing any type of hard line in the sand (as put forth by another contributor) is bad for all parties involved.
#3 The license agreement will have to be revisited at a later date. Its obvious that there are many flaws in it, including a VERY large loophole they have left wide open.
#4 Oh, and those of you talking about starting a new hack site (you know who you are), I will avidly support a boycott of that site, and do everything in my power to ensure it doesn't fly. I will not condone a site that is being designed as a vbulletin.org alternative simply so that you can begin to charge for hacks. One of the great things about vBulletin is that most hacks are free. Try getting a macromedia extension for dreamweaver nowadays...they all used to be free, now they all cost money...I cannot willingly support something like that.

[FASherman]

If Jelsoft decided to sue for redistributing this hack, then could go after you for redistributing copyrighted code which the defendee wouldn't be able to defend. The amguity in the liscence regarding the context of this hack would never even be heard.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Jelsoft permits hacking their code and have even dedicated a website for the exchange of those hacks. They CANNOT selectively enforce a ban on hacking. If they tried to sue someone for distributing a hack because the "CHANGE THIS" part of the instructions contained code snipets protected by copyright, they would be tossed out of court in a New York minute. The only defense needed would be to give the judge the URL to this site.

[FASherman]

I believe my post shortly after Kier made his statement completely refutes his claim.

Look, we can go on about this round and round.

#1 Having vB Staff approval for all hacks would doom this product.

Their attitude may do that just as easily.

#2 Jelsoft has agreed to work out a comprimise on this hack. If the author is unwilling, then he is as guilty as Jelsoft for thinking it was a good idea to just ban this hack outright in the first place. Drawing any type of hard line in the sand (as put forth by another contributor) is bad for all parties involved.

The hacker has no driving reason to engage in a compromise. He believes the code does not violate the LA. Jelsoft believes it does. The burden of proof is on Jelsoft. They may be able to curtail distribution through this site, but that is all they can do outside of a courtroom.

#3 The license agreement will have to be revisited at a later date. Its obvious that there are many flaws in it, including a VERY large loophole they have left wide open.

They can revise it all they want, but it won't affect anyone with an owned license prior to the change. Their ownship remains under the LA in place at the time of pruchase. Nor will it affect a leased license until the renewal date following the revision.

#4 Oh, and those of you talking about starting a new hack site (you know who you are), I will avidly support a boycott of that site, and do everything in my power to ensure it doesn't fly. I will not condone a site that is being designed as a vbulletin.org alternative simply so that you can begin to charge for hacks. One of the great things about vBulletin is that most hacks are free. Try getting a macromedia extension for dreamweaver nowadays...they all used to be free, now they all cost money...I cannot willingly support something like that.

Who said we advocate charging for such a site? Is this your first and blatantly obvious attempt at discrediting such a site? I think we need a VB hacks site completely independent of Jelsoft's draconian overlord policy.

[Reeve of shinra]

Fasherman,

If this legal endevor took place here in the states, the DMCA (as much as I hate it) would make it even easier for Jelsoft to get it shut down. Yes, Jelsoft can enforce this because only liscenced users are able to view the code alterations here at vb.org. Joe off the street does not have access to that copyrighted information as they would on a third party hack site. This is trivial. My arguement was simply to proove that in a court of law, Jelsoft would have a leg to stand on.

Now, if this made it to a court of law, would that really benifit anyone? No. Thats untold amounts of time and aggrivation for everyone involved. Ultimately that hurts us because thats time that could be better spent making vbulletin better.

My final thoughts on this is that there needs to be compromise.

I think we all recognize vbulletin as a quality product since we've all purchased it and are using it. What makes our forums better are the hacks we're now using for it, some of which we've probably obtained here at vb.org.

If we wanted to draw a hard line in the sand and not give an inch, then Jelsoft may decide a site like vb.org is more hassle than its worth and close it down. Would that hurt thier business? Yes. Would it hurt us? Yes.

Obviously there is mutual benifit to having an active and growing hacking community since it promotes thier product, making it more desireable, and makes our own lives easier or better with the add-ons we find here. Its a symbiotic relationship were all benifit.

If they decide that out of the hundreds of hacks that have been created and posted here, that 1 should be revised a bit so it complies with the spirit of the liscence, that is not a huge compromise to make. In return, we have had Jelsoft listen to our feedback just days before this started about the changes we felt were needed here on vb.org. Thats compromise.

[dieKetzer]

i remeber a time when john was just some guy on the infopop ubb boards talking about a php based forum package he was working on. infopop continually refused to implement features that had been requested (and promised) time and time again. thats what vbulletin was borne of. how long have we been waiting for jelsoft to release a vb version that actually works the way most of us use our forums? clan forum hosting is big part of vb, and many of us have been waiting AGES AND AGES AND AGES for jelsoft to make this sort of thing less of a pain. if vb3 allowed an option to allow forum mods to select colors, buttons, and a header.gif i would have no use for this hack. but, just like infopop, you let the releases go and go while never implementing this functionality. where's infopop today?

i will be installing this hack, and i am confident that i am well within my legal rights to do so.

[FASherman]

There is no "spirit" of the license. Licenses are strictly interpreted agreements. In areas of ambiguity, the law always makes the presumption in favor of the person that did not author the license, in short, us.

Thats the way the legal system works. If Jelsoft cannot find a violation of the literal words contained in the license agreement, they have no legal standing.

Their whole argument consists of loose interpetation, on their part, of sublicensing. It would be clear to anyone who viewed the hack CP that there is no sublicensing issue.

[Briboy923]

EDIT: I know my post is long, but if your viewing this message, please read it. Pretty much poured my heart out into what I said, and I really mean it, but for both this issue and a lot of other issues, I make a good point at the end if you want to skip the whole "Music Industry" analogy.

I can see how this may be an issue with people that use this hack the wrong way i.e. John Doe sets up a domain called virtualvb.com, installs his vb board then installs this hack and uses the vb subscription feature to charge people to have their own miniature forum within his forum. But what about us members who actually see a good benefit from this within our own community, rather than try to make a profit?

This quote is from like... page 2, but anyways. I know this has been said HUNDREDS of times, but restatting the point. On my forum, I have just under 75 sub-forums, in over 15 categories. To save space, I used this hack to assign each category an actual forum. This is because our company has 5 different subsidiaries, and each of those has its own group of subsidiaries. Charging people for virtual VB THAT IS ILLEGAL. It clearly says you cant resell or rent out space. So, yes, thats where the liability is. But its just like the thousands of pirated VB's out there. we dont know they are pirated until we catch them, and we dont know if someone is using this hack to do what you said unless we catch them. Even though we know there are so many pirated copies, that doesnt stop Jelsoft from distributing copies of VB instead of making customers "host" their forum on a shared server (and thus, not being able to edit, retrieve, or view the code of the files).

I take this thread as an omen right now, because as we speak, I am finishing up a persuasive speach about warez (in particular, whether downloading music should be outlawed and can/should be stopped). The answer is flat out NO. It cant. What goes on behind private FTP's is nobody's business. Hell, I know people who have burned copies of VB for friends and mailed it USPS. I mean, you cant just take away peoples rights. When somebody goes in to a movie to videotape it, thats against the law. BUT, its against the law because that directly violates copyright issues. Same with music, games, etc. Nonetheless, people still do it. People dont get caught. Why? Because it would take the entire world's police force to crack down on people who steal copyrighted material. As I said earlier, you dont know who is doing it until your caught. Just like the poor 12 year old kids that are getting sued for downloading Britney spears. And you know what my speech says? "Let em do it". Sure, they may not be going out and spending 18 bucks on a CD. But ya know what they ARE doing? Going out and begging mommy and daddy to buy them a $100 concert ticket. So, wheres the oppurtunity cost in that? Reports show that 10% of an artist's income is from CD's. The rest? Promotions, Ads, Concerts, etc. How do people KNOW who Outkast is? Because 100,000,000 copies of Hey Ya are on computers ILLEGALY. So why is Outkast one of the wealthiest artists? Because everyone goes to their concerts, everyone listens to them in their ads, everyone KNOWS them.

IRCSpy.com has been up for a long time. You go there knowing you're getting illegal material. But, whats also on IRCSpy is freeware, trialware, demo's, etc. Thus, you're mixing the legal with the illegal. And again, you can't stop it. People pay for their servers. People pay for their homes. I have friends that keep cocaine, pot, all sorts of drugs in their homes. They arent caught. Why? Because the Feds dont know. Cyber-property is the same way. The gov isnt ALLOWED to snoop peoples servers with un-justified search and seizure. Its in the damn Patriot act.

My point here is, and I do have a point, and this isnt because I like the hack, but its because I am a huge civil rights person (and Im only in 10th grade). In the majority of software business', close to 75% of all of a company's sales are from resellers (our definition of resellers doenst include other companies, it could be ads on sites, word of mouth, etc). I am going to let you know right now that 8 of my forum members asked me whether to buy the Owned License or the Leased license of VB in the last week. Why? Because they loved what you can do with it. What I did for a few days, before this hack was taken down, was offer trial admins on a little sub-forum made by VBHost. So, I resold 8 copies of VB. Imagine that times 100 other forums. Whats going on here is an unjustified assumption. You are ASSUMING that if this hack gets into peoples hands, they will use it wrongly. And you know what, that could be true. Many warez sites that offer VB also offer fake VB.org accounts, ftp's with hundreds of hacks, etc. Why are they still up? you havent caught em. But, I bet you my entire lifes savings, that at least ONE person, of all of those illegal forums, have bought VB because they enjoyed it and didnt know where or how or even that they could get it illegally. One person DOES make a difference.

On an expoential equation, if you take one person, double it, and each month double it again, in a few years, your Bill gates =) Simple story. I rest my case. I dont care whether or not this hack is re-instated, but I hold my ground. Thats all I got to say =)

[Morrus]

Now, if this made it to a court of law, would that really benifit anyone? No. Thats untold amounts of time and aggrivation for everyone involved. Ultimately that hurts us because thats time that could be better spent making vbulletin better.

I agree.

It's not a vB owner who would take this to court, you know! The only people who could is Jelsoft - they're the only ones who have an interest in enforcing anything (and "standing", to use the correct term). They need legal action to prevent someone from using the hack; no one needs legal action to use it in the first place - they just go ahead and use it. So it's a non-issue unless Jelsoft decide to make it one, and I doubt very much that they would.

[Morrus]

Charging people for virtual VB THAT IS ILLEGAL. It clearly says you cant resell or rent out space. So, yes, thats where the liability is.

No offence, and I can see that you care very much about what you're saying, but have you read the license or - more importantly - this thread?

The whole discussion going on in this thread centers around the fact that the license DOESN'T say that. It only says you can't resell the software itself.

If the license actually said that, this thread wouldn't exist. :D

[ap0c]

There is no "spirit" of the license. Licenses are strictly interpreted agreements. In areas of ambiguity, the law always makes the presumption in favor of the person that did not author the license, in short, us.

Thats the way the legal system works. If Jelsoft cannot find a violation of the literal words contained in the license agreement, they have no legal standing.

Their whole argument consists of loose interpetation, on their part, of sublicensing. It would be clear to anyone who viewed the hack CP that there is no sublicensing issue.
This is where your arguement fails and you would lose in court. By allowing other sites to use your forums, ie," link back to your site: " to create subforums and control them as they see fit, that is a violation of the LA.

License Agreement
The Software is licensed only to you. You may not rent, lease, sublicence, sell, assign, pledge, transfer or otherwise dispose of the Software in any form, on a temporary or permanent basis, without the prior written consent of Jelsoft.
No one, according to this section, has the right to sublicence or assign their copy of vbulletin to other sites without Jelsoft's approval.
Since the hack contains the ability of another site to use your vb, again the "link back to your site:," it is in direct violation of the LA.

[Briboy923]

No offence, and I can see that you care very much about what you're saying, but have you read the license or - more importantly - this thread?

The whole discussion going on in this thread centers around the fact that the license DOESN'T say that. It only says you can't resell the software itself.

If the license actually said that, this thread wouldn't exist. :D

Exactly. The reason why I brougt that up was to counteract what Hyper said. The rest was directed towards Jelsoft / Wayne in attempt to persuade them that maybe allowing this, especially since it doesnt mention anything about this in the license, would benefit them as it is doing to other industries. Its interesting, because the music business, which is the one that is persuing warez the most, is the ONLY industry out of Games, Movies, and Music, that is currently benefitting from Warez.

[FASherman]

This is where your arguement fails and you would lose in court. By allowing other sites to use your forums, ie," link back to your site: " to create subforums and control them as they see fit, that is a violation of the LA.
No one, according to this section, has the right to sublicence or assign their copy of vbulletin to other sites without Jelsoft's approval.

It is not a sublicense. It doesn't allow the user who creates the forum to establish any policy.

Whatever my policies are regarding user registration, avatar usage, group memberships, attachments, PMs, calendars, etc are inherited by the newly created forum. Linking has no bearing. VB allows one to create forums that are really links, hence they already stipulate to the use of cross-linking sites within the software. It is immaterial whether that occurs in a header - which many forums do through banner ads, or as the forum.

Remember, they can't create a forum and control it as they see fit. They can merely create subforums and assign styles. Plain and simple. That very limited functionality will not stand up in court as a sublicensing.

[SpeedStreet]

This is where your arguement fails and you would lose in court. By allowing other sites to use your forums, ie," link back to your site: " to create subforums and control them as they see fit, that is a violation of the LA.
No one, according to this section, has the right to sublicence or assign their copy of vbulletin to other sites without Jelsoft's approval.
Since the hack contains the ability of another site to use your vb, again the "link back to your site:," it is in direct violation of the LA.
Simply put, that is just wrong. The problem with any type of verbiage associated with that type of implication, is that you couldn't create any manner of portal site or way for sites to be networked. In effect, vBulletin itself would be nearly in direct violation of that agreement by providing the ability to setup a link within the forumhome template back to another site.

The only thing preventing this would be the sheer fact that all of those links also are running their own vBulletin.

The problem here, is that this is a huge grey area. Sure, GreyFinalFantasySite.com can create a page and say, "To discuss GFFSite.com, click here." Then, the user would be moved offsite to VbHOSTINGVBulletin.com where the person has set up their own part of the site, with similar colors and a different header.

The problem is, they still work off the same vBulletin. The user would have to still register within the overall network of vbhostingvbulletin.com, and anytime they reach the top of the breadcrumb, it would be the true nature of the site that runs and owns the content.

That being said, I have wasted ENTIRELY too much time researching and pouring my heart over the vBulletin Licensing Agreement...I've read the thing almost 10 times now. Here are the parts which trip up either side if this were brought to litigation:


vBulletin ('the Software') is a copyrighted work of authorship and is also protected under applicable database laws.

The Good: Jelsoft does the smart thing by declaring vBulletin as The Software. Provided that copyright law has been followed, the terms of exactly what vBulletin is should be easy to prove in a court of law. Thereby determing that the licensing agreement is in fact viable.

The Bad: Insufficient by any standards. You cannot claim copyright without broadcasting type of copyright (US, International, etc.) or broadcasting that copyright data can be obtained by contacting the following source. Also, a broad assumption of "Applicable Database Laws" does no good without citing which laws the licensing agreement heretofore references as being the foundation for said license agreement.


vBulletin licence grants you the right to run one instance (a single installation) of the Software on one web server and one web site for each licence purchased. Each licence may power one instance of the Software on one domain. For each installed instance of the Software, a separate licence is required.


The Good: Jelsoft does a bang up job here by declaring that only one instance of the software be installed on one web server and one web site for each license purchased

The Bad: No verbiage about exactly what defines a singular instance. In these estimations, any link to www.speedstreet.org/forums is ok, irregardless of content provided, so long as the link that appears in the URL bar is only to one server, one database and one domain.


The Software is licensed only to you. You may not rent, lease, sublicence, sell, assign, pledge, transfer or otherwise dispose of the Software in any form, on a temporary or permanent basis, without the prior written consent of Jelsoft.


The Good: The wording is ok.

The Bad: By not clearly defining what an instance is in the previous bullet, assigning a software function such as vbhosting as a sublicensing product is nigh impossible. Since the hack falls within the established parameters of an instance, you cannot apply any manner of infringement violation due to its inherent nature.

---
This is all I will go into without working directly with the JelSoft team. I think that the best thing to do for Jelsoft would be to bring someone in to help with Risk Assesment, because having a virtual company such as this leaves you open to risk and liability because you have so many "representatives" of your organization speaking. The minute someone posts and a Team suffix is attached to their name, it becomes company mantra.

We cannot blame GameCrash for the fantastic work he has done with this hack. He takes some of the best features of the vBulletin software and develops them even further. The sadness ensues when you realize that this hack can facilitate the destruction of the integrity of our community, simply by allowing any jackass to create their own section on your boards.

GameCrash, please consider revising your hack to increase additional security. It can be a tremendous boost to our group as a whole, if only a few minor tweaks were made to it.

[SpeedStreet]

It is not a sublicense. It doesn't allow the user who creates the forum to establish any policy.

Whatever my policies are regarding user registration, avatar usage, group memberships, attachments, PMs, calendars, etc are inherited by the newly created forum. Linking has no bearing. VB allows one to create forums that are really links, hence they already stipulate to the use of cross-linking sites within the software. It is immaterial whether that occurs in a header - which many forums do through banner ads, or as the forum.

Remember, they can't create a forum and control it as they see fit. They can merely create subforums and assign styles. Plain and simple. That very limited functionality will not stand up in court as a sublicensing.
Perhaps you should see the hack.

You have alot of control over forums. You can create forums, categories, subforums, etc. You have TOTAL control over the display of forums and content in your subforum. What you do not have control over are global options...and that is where the gray areas are.

[13th_Disciple]

This is where your arguement fails and you would lose in court. By allowing other sites to use your forums, ie," link back to your site: " to create subforums and control them as they see fit, that is a violation of the LA.

That is completely wrong and you should see that from reading your own post. I already have subforums for other sites.. if that is illegal, sue me.. if this hack makes my ability to provide that exact service, as i already do, as do a million other sites, then gimme the hack and sue me some more..


No one, according to this section, has the right to sublicence or assign their copy of vbulletin to other sites without Jelsoft's approval.
Since the hack contains the ability of another site to use your vb, again the "link back to your site:," it is in direct violation of the LA.

No one is sub-licensed.. I am the license holder, I and the dude within the vB info on the vB.com/members section..

this entire arguement anymore is stupid as people are making out what they want and reading into what isn't there..

release the damn hack.. if some admin is dumb enough to just let anyone create forums on his board, the good luck in the contest.. the forums won't last long anyway.. this is stupid anymore.. people have no clue or idea of the original arguement anymore..

and as far as the DMCA protecting Jelsoft, sick those anal tards on me too.. EFF.org exists for a reason.. and they will deal with it for me after examining the software package, the license, and everything contained with vb.com and .org..

[FASherman]

What you do not have control over are global options...and that is where the gray areas are.

No, thats what makes it so clearly not a sublicensing. Its not grey at all.

[FASherman]

EFF.org exists for a reason.. and they will deal with it for me after examining the software package, the license, and everything contained with vb.com and .org..

An excellent idea! Perhaps someone shoulf email the EFF and request they join the discussion. I'd but dollars to dounuts that Jelsoft would take notice if they gave an opinion that the hack doesn't violate the LA.

[CMerritt]

To echo one of SpeedStreet's comments, and to go back to my original post on page 12: I don't think we've received a response from GameCrash about the possibility to modify the hack to meet the vB Team's concerns.

I believe there was already a response from at least one vB Team member advising that if the hack were set up so that moderators had access to the vBHosting admin, then it would meet current criteria.

GameCrash, I realize that this is a change from your original intent... but based on the value it would provide to the community as a whole, and specific users like me, I'd encourage you to consider changing the scope of the vBHosting hack. It would require admins to setup their moderation staff, but would then give those moderators significant control over their own conferences/subforums, allow admins like me to step back from making individual changes for multiple subforums. Overall, it would be an incredible value to communities... while it may not give the same functions to every user, it would still allow smaller communities within a large discussion community.

It's obviously caused quite a stir, both for the immense value it has and the licensing issues. I'd encourage you to consider re-releasing it with the 'compromise' modifications.

-Chad

[sabret00the]

An excellent idea! Perhaps someone shoulf email the EFF and request they join the discussion. I'd but dollars to dounuts that Jelsoft would take notice if they gave an opinion that the hack doesn't violate the LA.
wow such trouble makers, if you all make it a bigger issue than it is then what's to stop jelsoft closing down the service that is vb.org? upsetting an organisation for one hack is pointless, to the best of my knowledge jelsoft rarely revoke licenses and thus pm'ing gamecrash and asking him to send you the hack won't cause you a problem, just install it, be happy and leave this thread alone.

it really isn't that big of a deal.

[FASherman]

To echo one of SpeedStreet's comments, and to go back to my original post on page 12: I don't think we've received a response from GameCrash about the possibility to modify the hack to meet the vB Team's concerns.

I believe there was already a response from at least one vB Team member advising that if the hack were set up so that moderators had access to the vBHosting admin, then it would meet current criteria.

GameCrash, I realize that this is a change from your original intent... but based on the value it would provide to the community as a whole, and specific users like me, I'd encourage you to consider changing the scope of the vBHosting hack. It would require admins to setup their moderation staff, but would then give those moderators significant control over their own conferences/subforums, allow admins like me to step back from making individual changes for multiple subforums. Overall, it would be an incredible value to communities... while it may not give the same functions to every user, it would still allow smaller communities within a large discussion community.

It's obviously caused quite a stir, both for the immense value it has and the licensing issues. I'd encourage you to consider re-releasing it with the 'compromise' modifications.

-Chad

I think it should be left as-is. The value isn't in having moderators build new forums, but rather users - the ones who ultimately build up the community.

I'd suggest that you stick to your guns and release it somewhere else as it is now.

[Dark_Wizard]

I'd suggest that you stick to your guns and release it somewhere else as it is now.

I hope he does....

[eXtremeTim]

This hack in the manner I would be using it for would be totaly legal. I would only be using it to host a forums for my users like I already do. This would just make things a little more streamlined.

[GameCrash]

To echo one of SpeedStreet's comments, and to go back to my original post on page 12: I don't think we've received a response from GameCrash about the possibility to modify the hack to meet the vB Team's concerns.

I believe there was already a response from at least one vB Team member advising that if the hack were set up so that moderators had access to the vBHosting admin, then it would meet current criteria.
I have not yet gotten a message by Jelsoft stating what they want. All I know is they deleted my thread, so I don't know what would be needed to make the hack compatible and if that would be acceptable.

[SpeedStreet]

I think it should be left as-is. The value isn't in having moderators build new forums, but rather users - the ones who ultimately build up the community.

I'd suggest that you stick to your guns and release it somewhere else as it is now.
Users provide content to the community...Even though I love my guests, there is no way that I want to give them access to creating forums.

If there is a need dictated by my driven content, then I, as an administrator and owner of my organization, will decide where it should go. I like this hack because it gives me the abliity to turn areas over to my moderators, and allow them to build them up, based on my reccomendations.

You don't want every jackass in the world requesting a forum, simply because they want their own little piece of the pie...look how crapped up EZBoard is! If you give people the ability to do the same thing with a sleeker package like vBulletin, you are going to have 8,000 forums per board, with 10 posts per forum!

GameCrash was definitely on the right track, trying to add as much functionality as possible to his hack, but there definitely has to be a line drawn somewhere.

[lasto]

a lot of interesting points of view in this thread for and against but the one thing that cleary sticks out is that if the hack is made so mods and above have complete control then jelsoft will allow it and seeing as their is no control over new members making sections id rather go for the moderators thing.

Lets not kill this hack - lets compromise so vbull can get back to where it was as to be honest the board is dying at moment as all eyes are on this thread.
A little bit of give on both sides goes a long way so GameCrash choice is with you - If Jelsoft say they will allow it if Mods and above control the sections will you go with it ?

[Briboy923]

You know whats EXTREMELY ironic. People have been waiting for VB3 Gold for weeks, months, some even years. After finally releasing it, not even more than 24-48 hours after its release, look what comes up. First, I take back most of what I said earlier, because after installing the hack on my testboard, I now see why there is some concern. However, I am not going any further into my opinion. I feel this thread should be locked, because as someone else said, the argument and facts are being twisted way to much.

[FASherman]

a lot of interesting points of view in this thread for and against but the one thing that cleary sticks out is that if the hack is made so mods and above have complete control then jelsoft will allow it and seeing as their is no control over new members making sections id rather go for the moderators thing.

Lets not kill this hack - lets compromise so vbull can get back to where it was as to be honest the board is dying at moment as all eyes are on this thread.
A little bit of give on both sides goes a long way so GameCrash choice is with you - If Jelsoft say they will allow it if Mods and above control the sections will you go with it ?

Thats no compromise. It kills the purpose for the hack. The bottom line is Jelsoft has no legal basis for their decision. Release the hack elsewhere, but by god, release it.

[Zachariah]

*thoughts - of this hack

Its about time. I have been looken for a lot of what has been done.

If I make a person a Admin of a forum they should be able to add forums, colors, ect .. in their forum they are incharge of. I like a lot of what I see in the hack. Few changes here and there to make in where ppl can not sign up. I dig on the options of making a user class be able to do what they want in the forum they are responcible for.

I have been looking for those kind of options in a forum script since I went to personal hosting vs. EZboard when I started playing with vb2.0

[lasto]

You know whats EXTREMELY ironic. People have been waiting for VB3 Gold for weeks, months, some even years. After finally releasing it, not even more than 24-48 hours after its release, look what comes up. First, I take back most of what I said earlier, because after installing the hack on my testboard, I now see why there is some concern. However, I am not going any further into my opinion. I feel this thread should be locked, because as someone else said, the argument and facts are being twisted way to much.

ere cant lock the thread just cause u dont like the debate - leave it open.Is reason why nothing gets sorted cause people wanna sweep it under the carpet.
Most of us who have replied in this thread proberly will never use this hack but the underlying point here is based on one thing and that is the PRINCIPLE.

[FASherman]

Most of us who have replied in this thread proberly will never use this hack but the underlying point here is based on one thing and that is the PRINCIPLE.

Amen, Brutha!

[trafix]

I think everythig has been said sooooooo many times that if you deleted all the duplicate arguments the thread would only be 5 pages instead of 22 :)

Give it a break and get a life ..... there is more to vborg than this thread!

[dieKetzer]

I think everythig has been said sooooooo many times that if you deleted all the duplicate arguments the thread would only be 5 pages instead of 22 :)

Give it a break and get a life ..... there is more to vborg than this thread!
but there is no hack that does what this does, and as a result this is the only thread of interest to me. if it doesn't interest you, don't read it.
i've been waiting a very long time for vb3, and now that it's out i see that it still is in the dark ages in regards to moderator empowerment. i want to be able to completely turn over a board to a mod and have them set the colour scheme, set access if its a private forum, post announcements in that forum, and so on. but vb once again elected to overlook this kind of functionality that would be invaluble to a gaming site that hosts clan forums. now gamecrash has written a hack that can do this - finally! - and jelsoft pulls it down just like that with a bs claim of infringement. that's why this is a hot topic and this is why so many people are interested in this thread!

[Xenon]

Argl 22 pages.

Please calm down a bit.

I have not read the entire thread, but something i can definitely say:
This matter is beeing discussed right now. It would not change anything if anyone is saying Jelsoft is right or wrong on this issue. I'm sure Jelsoft will ask it's lawyers, to find out wether this Hack is really breaking the license or not.
Depending on that state, things will continue.

[Stadler]

You don't want every jackass in the world requesting a forum, simply because they want their own little piece of the pie...look how crapped up EZBoard is! If you give people the ability to do the same thing with a sleeker package like vBulletin, you are going to have 8,000 forums per board, with 10 posts per forum!

GameCrash was definitely on the right track, trying to add as much functionality as possible to his hack, but there definitely has to be a line drawn somewhere.May I frame this? ;) I totally agree with that part. Rather than allowing 'every jackass' to have his own forum which is just the x-th forum about one topic and as a result having for example 20 IT-Forums, where every forum of that kind is covering more or less the same topic is not only totally useless, it would even cluster every forum into tons of small communities in which no one knows about the other one ... what a nightmare. IMHO automation of this should never be allowed, but I don't guess, GameCrash wanted to serve such a pupose in any way.

In short: Allowing misuse of this or similar hacks in a form which is the same or similar to Waynes example should definately be forbidden but not the hack in general.

[Chris|vB]

Just wait! :)

[lasto]

I think everythig has been said sooooooo many times that if you deleted all the duplicate arguments the thread would only be 5 pages instead of 22 :)

Give it a break and get a life ..... there is more to vborg than this thread!

this is hot topical debate and as such has drawn attention from all walks of life on vb.org and other boards.People have come to express their views on what they think on the subject of this hack.Maybe this will have a say in the final decision who knows but to tell people to get a life is not on,as people do have the right to an opinion unless that has been taken away in the LA agreement as well :)

(thats a joke by the way - notice the smiley :) )

* lasto is off to find a wife - u did say wife did`nt u trafix

[trafix]

this is hot topical debate and as such has drawn attention from all walks of life on vb.org and other boards.People have come to express their views on what they think on the subject of this hack.Maybe this will have a say in the final decision who knows but to tell people to get a life is not on,as people do have the right to an opinion unless that has been taken away in the LA agreement as well :)

(thats a joke by the way - notice the smiley :) )

* lasto is off to find a wife - u did say wife did`nt u trafix
lol .... wife would be good :), but i already have one

Guys dont get me wrong here, im as interested in the outcome as anyone else and i would use the hack if the situation was resolves successfully :) As i said earlier, i have a copy of the b2 version but i havnt installed it, and wont until i get the final word. Its a great idea and a lot of work has gone into it but there is the 2 main issues that have to be resolved first. aside from all that ...... HACK ON DUDE!

[Gio Takahashi]

vBHosting, an ability to make someone of a "sub Vbulletin", and that anyone can make it? Personally its kinda of a bad idea for Anyone to make it.

Allow moderator to control the section as per compromise, I like that idea better. but thats my 5 yen. I don't feel like saying anymore stuff that has been WAY over SAID already in a mere 2 days.

[Digital_Madness]

I honestly think that this modification is not all that new if you look back at the Moderators having permission to add/remove access masks of users to sub forums thus allowing them to basically admin their own boards. I have a site with several clans/teams and I am sure that more will come that need forum hosting and we supply that at basically whatever costs I cover, thus no one has to contribute if they dont want to so I still cant see how this has crossed that line in the sand that has caused all of this...

Please review this hack and tell me did this also break the lic?

https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showthread.php?t=28654

James

[ap0c]

I honestly think that this modification is not all that new if you look back at the Moderators having permission to add/remove access masks of users to sub forums thus allowing them to basically admin their own boards. I have a site with several clans/teams and I am sure that more will come that need forum hosting and we supply that at basically whatever costs I cover, thus no one has to contribute if they dont want to so I still cant see how this has crossed that line in the sand that has caused all of this...

Please review this hack and tell me did this also break the lic?

https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showthread.php?t=28654

James
Moderators having permission to add/remove access masks , not registered users

[nitro]

Theres many VBowners who allready charge other companys for sub forums that they have control over, its been going on for years, infact vb3 in its current raw form with subscribtions makes the whole thing a lot more simpler now.

Dunno perhaps it breaks its own LA

I was thinking of getting a second vb licence to do just this. but now it seems that It may be breaking the LA I wont.

It happens a lot on support forums where, ie software companies sponser or rent a sub forum with in a main site. I think if they was to go after all these the vb licence quantity could reduce by a huge amount.

I fully understand how it breaks the LA to distribute the vb package, but theres many things in the LA that is q2uestionable.

ie. you must not give a third party access to the code without VB team consent.
so there you cannot without consent from vb get a designer to add a style as this would give that designer full access to the admin panel and the ftp where the php is.

You cannot dispose of without consent of VB by way of rent or purchase ?
Well i think legally VB would have to have exceptional grounds to not consent to you selling your licence or even leasing a website that includes avb installation. Therefore they would have to find good reason why a sale or lease was bad to make any legal battle worth while.

One of the main things iv seen licence agreements do is attempt to null an void your statutory rights, in many countries that in itself is illegal and often deems the entire licence or contract null and void.

On a high note anyone read the online nvidia driver download LA ?
If your an international buriness person do not buy a laptop with an nvidia
Travilling internationally with nvidia drivers breaks their LA

Dual booting with windows 2000 and xp.
Not with Nvidia its against their LA no matter if you own both os licences.

Got 2 computers in the house, make sure you dont use the same download to install to both these comps even though the grafic cards may be of different eras, with their LA and unified drivers its against their LA.

Boxed software is the funniest
By opening this software package you agree to the EULA.
errrrm but the box contains the eula infact I may not even get to read it till I start to install.
Please sign this blank piece of paper, Really I wont add bankers draft to it or your house deeds. :)

[Digital_Madness]

Moderators having permission to add/remove access masks , not registered users

That is the point... They request the sub-forum and when it is created they are basically moderators with the ability to add/remove more sub-forums for their own little world. How is this any different from any other type of management hack? I have a board where we have nowhere near the time to manage all the sub-forums for all of our users so we use this moderator hack and would not have stuck with vbull had this hack not been available.

[Logikos]

Maybe we need a VBHacks website not CONTROLLED by Jelsoft?
I own www.vbhacks.us :) Any bids? lol

[Logikos]

Damm just relised it was 23 pages, read it all and i don't see an offical statment from Jelsoft saying it is banned. Hurry up alrighty

[trafix]

lol it took you 55 mins to read the thread?

[13th_Disciple]

300+ posts and only 55 minutes.. i'd say that ain't too bad..

someone mentioned Jelsoft approaching their attorney.. if that happens, the attorney is not goign to favor us.. we don't pay his mercedes car payment.. what he would likely say is tell them/ ask them not to use it, disallow it from the site, then modify the La to make sure you CYA.. (cover your ass)

i doubt this hack will be around in it's already existing state.. that said, i want the existing state hack.. not the the toned down, jelsoft version..

and nemisis, if you have enough interest, i personally will buy the license for vBulletin for you to run that site.. but i will need a private forum for my pr0n threads.. :p

[Dark Shogun]

300+ posts and only 55 minutes.. i'd say that ain't too bad..

someone mentioned Jelsoft approaching their attorney.. if that happens, the attorney is not goign to favor us.. we don't pay his mercedes car payment.. what he would likely say is tell them/ ask them not to use it, disallow it from the site, then modify the La to make sure you CYA.. (cover your ass)

i doubt this hack will be around in it's already existing state.. that said, i want the existing state hack.. the the toned down, jelsoft version..

and nemisis, if you have enough interest, i personally will buy the license for vBulletin for you to run that site.. but i will need a private forum for my pr0n threads.. :p
The license is the easy part. vBulletin.org probably uses like 1-2 TB of bandwidth or more each month.

Dark Shogun

[13th_Disciple]

i have a dedicated server that has a TB of allowable BW per month.. i only use about 15 to 20 GB of that allowable BW..

also, there are some rather cheap hosting venues now that offer a fair amount of space and BW.. so it wouldn't be hard to find a place..

[Dark Shogun]

i have a dedicated server that has a TB of allowable BW per month.. i only use about 15 to 20 GB of that allowable BW..

also, there are some rather cheap hosting venues now that offer a fair amount of space and BW.. so it wouldn't be hard to find a place..
Yeah but thats like $100 (for cheap places) - $600 and up. If you don't have any steady income coming in from the site it could be pretty hard.

Dark Shogun

[SpeedStreet]

Yeah but thats like $100 (for cheap places) - $600 and up. If you don't have any steady income coming in from the site it could be pretty hard.

Dark Shogun
Topic please.

[FASherman]

Topic please.

Oh bother. The self-appointed "topic cop".

If you don't think planning for a hack site separate from Jelsoft's control isn't part of the topic, then you aren't paying attention.

[eXtremeTim]

Im starting to get tired of this vbulletin crap. They dont want us the paying users to be able to make the mosts of our boards with so many limit on how hacks can be released and what hacks cant be released. I know of a few nice hacks that cant be released here becuase they decided no. This is a hack site so all hacks should be allowed. One of the ones Im refering to is the thread lockdown hack. This has plenty of good uses within the liscense but yet it cant be released here becuase its main idea was for urls to certain sites. Im getting really tired of this crap.

[FASherman]

Im starting to get tired of this vbulletin crap. They dont want us the paying users to be able to make the mosts of our boards with so many limit on how hacks can be released and what hacks cant be released. I know of a few nice hacks that cant be released here becuase they decided no. This is a hack site so all hacks should be allowed. One of the ones Im refering to is the thread lockdown hack. This has plenty of good uses within the liscense but yet it cant be released here becuase its main idea was for urls to certain sites. Im getting really tired of this crap.
The question is whether we are going to continue being tired of draconian overseers or are we going to do something about it? Lets get a new site off the ground. We have someone with a domain, another willing to host it, lets continue to see this through.

[Dark Shogun]

Topic please.
My post was on the subtopic. The main topic is regarding vBHosting. The subtopic would be about having a site not under the vbulletin.com thumb.

Dark Shogun

[13th_Disciple]

Yeah but thats like $100 (for cheap places) - $600 and up. If you don't have any steady income coming in from the site it could be pretty hard.

Dark Shogun
Like I said, I have a full dedicated FreeBSD server on a 10MB connection.. I am allowed 1000 GB's of BW per month.. I would be willing to work out an arrangement to get a site up and running.. in fact, have already had a pm to the affect of interest and an offer to help financially to offset any burden of cost.. while i know that no single person can foot the bill all the time, I have to pay for the server every month already.. so it is going nowhere.. besides.. I may find someone who knows FreeBSD inside and out and can help me manage the server itself..

it is running IPFW because of some lamers trying to knock it down from time to time.. but anymore, that's every server out there..

anyway, offer is on the table.. clearly defined..

[Dark Shogun]

Like I said, I have a full dedicated FreeBSD server on a 10MB connection.. I am allowed 1000 GB's of BW per month.. I would be willing to work out an arrangement to get a site up and running.. in fact, have already had a pm to the affect of interest and an offer to help financially to offset any burden of cost.. while i know that no single person can foot the bill all the time, I have to pay for the server every month already.. so it is going nowhere.. besides.. I may find someone who knows FreeBSD inside and out and can help me manage the server itself..

it is running IPFW because of some lamers trying to knock it down from time to time.. but anymore, that's every server out there..

anyway, offer is on the table.. clearly defined..
That is sooooooo cool. You shouldn't have a problem finding someone that would want to open up a hack site.

Dark Shogun

[twoseven]

if it comes down to it why not try to work something out with Evb that way we dont have so many splinter sites help keep things consolidated

[Dark_Wizard]

Like I said, I have a full dedicated FreeBSD server on a 10MB connection.. I am allowed 1000 GB's of BW per month.. I would be willing to work out an arrangement to get a site up and running.. in fact, have already had a pm to the affect of interest and an offer to help financially to offset any burden of cost.. while i know that no single person can foot the bill all the time, I have to pay for the server every month already.. so it is going nowhere.. besides.. I may find someone who knows FreeBSD inside and out and can help me manage the server itself..

it is running IPFW because of some lamers trying to knock it down from time to time.. but anymore, that's every server out there..

anyway, offer is on the table.. clearly defined..

I'll help in anyway I can as I no longer release my hacks here due to the political crap this site imposes on the licensed users of vb...

Note: If there is another site for vb hacks like vbhacks.us (or evb thats already established) I will move my hacks there...I also suggest those with large hacks have some input or mod status if they are willing to help this through...

[FASherman]

if it comes down to it why not try to work something out with Evb that way we dont have so many splinter sites help keep things consolidated

Didn't the guy from EVB say that he'd remove hacks at Jelsoft's request? I think we need a little more spine than that.

One other question. Is there a lawyer around who can help the site owner set up the site in a way to avoid personal liability?

[JohnXWA]

Could someone e-mail me thie vBHosting hack? [email removed]

Not for live use, I manage sub forums directly (I don't like handing out admin rights even over sub forums) I just wanna see whatthe fuss is about.

Thanks

[Dark_Wizard]

One other question. Is there a lawyer around who can help the site owner set up the site in a way to avoid personal liability?

I may be able to help out on this as one of my sites is a lawyers firm...let me see if they will do me a favor....I'll get back to you as quickly as possible.

[Thanatos]

I may be able to help out on this as one of my sites is a lawyers firm...let me see if they will do me a favor....I'll get back to you as quickly as possible.
Yes..EvB said they would remove hacks at jelsoft's request..so, hacks like lockdown or this hack would be banned from there as well...so yes, we need a site with more backbone.

[Dark_Wizard]

Could someone e-mail me thie vBHosting hack? [email removed]

Not for live use, I manage sub forums directly (I don't like handing out admin rights even over sub forums) I just wanna see whatthe fuss is about.

Thanks

I think after all this a few of us would really like to see this hack but I doubt you will get it at least here....the author already stated he won't send it...if you do get it let me know I'm curious as well.

[Dark_Wizard]

Yes..EvB said they would remove hacks at jelsoft's request..so, hacks like lockdown or this hack would be banned from there as well...so yes, we need a site with more backbone.


I didn't know that...

[]\[]emesis -> how much do you want for vbhacks.us?

[FASherman]

Could someone e-mail me thie vBHosting hack? [email removed]

Not for live use, I manage sub forums directly (I don't like handing out admin rights even over sub forums) I just wanna see whatthe fuss is about.

Thanks

See it live here: http://www.vbulletinmods.com

[Thanatos]

Don't think he is selling it now DW :) ...think he is looking for help setting up the site...I pledged to help..but am no hacker...can only help with admin/mod/finances.

[twoseven]

Yes..EvB said they would remove hacks at jelsoft's request..so, hacks like lockdown or this hack would be banned from there as well...so yes, we need a site with more backbone.
i didn't realize that. my ignorance. and vb.nl removed them as well. guess we do need another board. i hate to see it but it may be required.

[SpeedStreet]

Didn't the guy from EVB say that he'd remove hacks at Jelsoft's request? I think we need a little more spine than that.

One other question. Is there a lawyer around who can help the site owner set up the site in a way to avoid personal liability?
Personal Liabililty can only be avoided in the instance of the foundation of articles of incorporation, or the development into a Limited Liability Partnership.

I really don't think you understand the ramifications of what you think you are trying to do FASherman.

YOU DO NOT OWN YOUR COPY OF VBULLETIN. You are merely the purchaser of a license allowing you to run that specific copy on one server, one domain in one instance. You retain no legal rights whatsoever to modify, alter, change, dispose of or replicate the code in any way, shape or form with Jelsoft's implied or direct consent. It would be *VER* easy for Jelsoft to add some verbiage into the existing licensing agreement stating that any code modifications to their software package are only availible for distribution from their own, controlled websites. This is their right when dealing with Intelectual Domain in the International Copyright Theater.

I decided (in the OODLES of free time I seem to have when I neglect my work) to do some further research into International Copyright law regarding Licensing Agreements, and I'm sorry to say that JelSoft does retain the right under certain conditions to modify the existing licensing agreement and enforce it retroactively on existing clients and license holders. The letter of the law is written to protect the authors, not the customer...as it should be.

Don't sit here and try to stage a little coup. Up until this point, there have been two hacks in dispute, and now everyone is talking about leaving the site....That's great. Let's splinter the community even further so even less can get done.

Without a centralized hub for modifiers, vBulletin will fall by the wayside. Hacks will become more poorly written, you'll have to check five or six sites to get what you want...and those that do not pay for vBulletin will then have access to that which sets our sites apart from theirs.

Think about what you are doing, and please drop it.

[SpeedStreet]

Could someone e-mail me thie vBHosting hack? [email removed]

Not for live use, I manage sub forums directly (I don't like handing out admin rights even over sub forums) I just wanna see whatthe fuss is about.

Thanks
No requests of this nature wil be honored. And I wish people would stop contacting me privately about this as well.

[SpeedStreet]

Oh hey, check this out:

http://www.vbulletinmods.com/

Its amazing damage you can do with a bit of MyIE2 + Copy and Paste...

Seven forums in 30 seconds. Imagine what someone you banned from the site can do by logging in in the middle of the night under a different IP could do...

[JohnXWA]

FASherman, thanks for the heads up but it won't let me register at this time. If you could send me the hack though i'd apprecaite it.

SpeedStreet, thats fair enough but just cuz you won't does not mean others won't.

Thanks

[Kaelon]

Our company's attorney, who specializes in Intellectual Property law, concurs with SpeedStreet's assessment.

That said, other large-scale forum software communities - like Ultimate Bulletin Board, or phpBB - have thrived in large part because of the autonomy of their coder and hacker communities. This is often considered a principal precondition upon the long-term viability and success of forum software in general - its ability to be modified to suit the needs and desires of its legitimate customers. If you consider the few case studies of forum software companies that have restricted or prohibited modification of their software in any form (e.g., WowBB, Wonderboard, and the like) it makes perfect sense for communities to pursue autonomous coding development environments.

Kaelon

[twoseven]

speed i totally understand those ramifications and what about releasing hacks that will actually spawn other hacks in a positive manor. right now i may have to write this script from scratch because its not available. which makes me mad. someone took his time to release something that could be of benifit and due to its power is removed.

[FASherman]

Personal Liabililty can only be avoided in the instance of the foundation of articles of incorporation, or the development into a Limited Liability Partnership.

Thats not entirely true. There are other methods as well.

I really don't think you understand the ramifications of what you think you are trying to do FASherman.

Sure I do.

YOU DO NOT OWN YOUR COPY OF VBULLETIN. You are merely the purchaser of a license allowing you to run that specific copy on one server, one domain in one instance. You retain no legal rights whatsoever to modify, alter, change, dispose of or replicate the code in any way, shape or form with Jelsoft's implied or direct consent. It would be *VER* easy for Jelsoft to add some verbiage into the existing licensing agreement stating that any code modifications to their software package are only availible for distribution from their own, controlled websites. This is their right when dealing with Intelectual Domain in the International Copyright Theater.

The License Agreement already allows for code modifications.

I decided (in the OODLES of free time I seem to have when I neglect my work) to do some further research into International Copyright law regarding Licensing Agreements, and I'm sorry to say that JelSoft does retain the right under certain conditions to modify the existing licensing agreement and enforce it retroactively on existing clients and license holders. The letter of the law is written to protect the authors, not the customer...as it should be.

That is correct. The letter of the law is applied to the Licensing Agreement and in cases where it is completely unambiguous, it is applied to protect the author. In cases where the license is ambiguous, then the interpretation is given to protect the defendent, not the author. Your analysis was only half-complete. Thats why Kier's "spirit of the contract" post was laughable.

Don't sit here and try to stage a little coup. Up until this point, there have been two hacks in dispute, and now everyone is talking about leaving the site....That's great. Let's splinter the community even further so even less can get done.

I'm glad those brave men who gathered in Philadelphia in 1776 had a little more backbone than you're demonstrating. Remember, we are REACTING to a Jelsoft action - deleting a hack because its not in their interest, not because it violates the LA. That determination can only be made in court be a judge.

The reality is they are enforcing their opinion as edict. They can only do this because it is their site. On a site free from their self-serving rules, their opinion becomes just that - an opinion. For it to have the full force of law, they have to file suit and carry the burden of proof. It ratches the argument up a few notches because if they fail to do due diligence, they stand to not only lose a suit, but a load of money as well in the inevitable counter-suit. They will not be able to be so cavalier as to assume they can impose the "spirit of the contract", something that has no legal weight.

Without a centralized hub for modifiers, vBulletin will fall by the wayside.

That is their choice. They precipitated this situation.

Hacks will become more poorly written...

The community of hackers is already self-policing on quality. This site has a load of poorly written hacks and hackers that call them on it. One of my first hacks falls into this category, so I know what I'm talking about.

... you'll have to check five or six sites to get what you want...

Hasn't Jelsoft already pushed us in this direction? Try posting a "template" hack here and watch the mods flame you. It belongs on one of the other Jelsoft sites.

...and those that do not pay for vBulletin will then have access to that which sets our sites apart from theirs.

We wouldn't be responsible for that. The only way that situation could possibly exist is if the base code is pirated. It is not our job to police the internet for Jelsoft's pirated software. Thats there job. I would say that we should ask everyone for their license and co-operate with providing user information if someone from Jelsoft identifies that as a pirate copy. Additionally, if they want to provide us a list of pirated licenses, I'm sure we would block them from registration and report their personal information proactively.

But as far as having them approve/disapprove the content, no way in hell.

Think about what you are doing, and please drop it.

When I see this hack reinstated, perhaps. But there may already be too much water under the bridge. Some actions, once began, take on a life of their own.

[13th_Disciple]

i don't think anyone is attempting a coup.. i also think smart enough admins know to restrict the creation of forums to only those that must be moderated.. ie.. ask for a forum, if it is legit, you get.. if not.. you get lost..

however, all that being said, i think the hack (vBhosting) was a LEGIT hack for LEGIT uses and as has been pointed out, almost all hacks can be used in a way for not so great means.. not to mention the software itself can be used for ill means.. such as forums set up where speech is so that it borders on liable, discrimination and anti-semetic.. but you can only patrol so much in a day..

governing is sometimes better left in the hands of the people licenses and laws are meant to govern.. not in the hands of a government or governing body..

i am not willing to set up a site in direct competition with any one particular party or entity.. but i don't think restricting the type of hacks made, unless the sole purpose is to generate harm or break law/copyright/trademark rules and/or laws..

i see no basic harm in this hack, and i see no basic harm in the lockdown hack.. i see basic harm in preventing people from gaining knowledge.. therefore insuring not only hostility, but genuine ignorance when there is no need for either.. ignorance is not bliss when there is a chance to give the knowledge and not maintain the ignorance..

anyway, if nemisis wants to set up a site, and he is willing to share his name and allow it hosted on my box, and dark wizard and miratos are willing to lend their ability to moderate and generally help run the boards, then i see no reason not to have a more open forum willing to discuss the pros and cons of EVERYTHING and not seek approval before generating a debate based on those pros and cons..

i will not seek to be an approved site of jelsoft.. i don't care about all of that.. nor do i think most honest people here, and even those dishonest.. let's face it, we all love the software (vBulletin) but we don't like the mushrooming (kept in the dark and fed ++++) mentality that has been increasing now for ages.. it is not only not fair to people who pat 85 to 160 for this software, it is unfair to the makers, in the long run, because then you have no chance to see the potential for good that can come out of something that at first glance may seem bad..

so if folks want to do a site, i am all for it and will deal with it on my box.. if not, that is ok too.. but an OPEN forum does not exist within any vB community.. and personally, i am ready for an OPEN FORUM to speak in.. and not have to constantly question myself and wonder if what i said is ok or not..

damn.. sorry about the diatribe.. :(

[Xenon]

Erm, let me throw in a fact:

The vb hosting hack has not been removed because of the fact that this site is controlled by Jelsoft.
It has been removed, because Jelsoft thinks that it is breaking the License agreement.
As i already said, the lawyers will have to look at this and decide, wether or not Jelsoft is right.

BUT: If Jelsoft is right, that this hack is breaking the License agreement, no other site is allowed to release this hack as well, as you're then supporting an illegal activity. So this whole discussion about another Hacking site because of this special topic here is irrelevant.

[nighteyes]

Erm, let me throw in a fact:

The vb hosting hack has not been removed because of the fact that this site is controlled by Jelsoft.
It has been removed, because Jelsoft thinks that it is breaking the License agreement.
As i already said, the lawyers will have to look at this and decide, wether or not Jelsoft is right.

BUT: If Jelsoft is right, that this hack is breaking the License agreement, no other site is allowed to release this hack as well, as you're then supporting an illegal activity. So this whole discussion about another Hacking site because of this special topic here is irrelevant.

Just because Jelsoft's paid lawyers say the hack is in breach of the licensing agreement, does not mean it actually is. As has already been discussed heavily here, the point is disputed and the only way to get a fair ruling is if Jelsoft chooses to pursue this matter in a court of law - with an impartial judge.

The fact that Jelsoft is apparently consulting with lawyers tells everyone there's no chance in hell this hack is ever coming back, whether its legal or illegal. They don't want people using it, they don't want to risk losing a few sales and they are now trying to ensure their licensing agreement covers and prevents another situation like this from happening again. Jelsoft has every right to enforce their licensing agreement to the letter.... but don't pass the buck and say any lawyers are to blame for this situation as it stands now. :)

[Thanatos]

Up until this point, there have been two hacks in dispute, and now everyone is talking about leaving the site....That's great. Let's splinter the community even further so even less can get done.

Hey Speed...I just want you to know, your ability to argue far outclasses mine, so I won't even try to compete on your level...but I did want to bring up just a couple of points.

Right now it is 2 hacks...it could be 3 next week...and 4 the week after...maybe 5 next month...etc. It isn't the number of hacks...its the principle. Especially when the reason for the removal of the hacks is nebulous at best.

The splintering of the community is something that TPTB brought on themselves with their heavy handed actions, policies and fostering of distrust and division within the community.

Xenon - it's not just all about this one hack either...this is just like the straw that broke the camel's back. Lockdown didn't break the LA. Again, it has to do with the principle.

As for whether or not it breaks the LA...only a judge can make that decision if the hack author wishes to put legal opinion to the test.

----

I think that the funny thing is...this hack probably would never have gotten so much attention if it had been left alone or if they had quietly asked for the name to be changed.

But hey...I could be wrong...IANAL...I reserve the right to be wrong on all counts.

and I am still up for helping with an unofficial hack site.

[Zachery]

Hey Speed...I just want you to know, your ability to argue far outclasses mine, so I won't even try to compete on your level...but I did want to bring up just a couple of points.

Right now it is 2 hacks...it could be 3 next week...and 4 the week after...maybe 5 next month...etc. It isn't the number of hacks...its the principle. Especially when the reason for the removal of the hacks is nebulous at best.

The splintering of the community is something that TPTB brought on themselves with their heavy handed actions, policies and fostering of distrust and division within the community.

Xenon - it's not just all about this one hack either...this is just like the straw that broke the camel's back. Lockdown didn't break the LA. Again, it has to do with the principle.

As for whether or not it breaks the LA...only a judge can make that decision if the hack author wishes to put legal opinion to the test.

----

I think that the funny thing is...this hack probably would never have gotten so much attention if it had been left alone or if they had quietly asked for the name to be changed.

But hey...I could be wrong...IANAL...I reserve the right to be wrong on all counts.

and I am still up for helping with an unofficial hack site.
The lockdown hacks policy is Jelsofts and it was imposed at the original hacking forum at vBulletin.com. It is used most of the time on warez boards for bad reasons, thus its not allowed.

[13th_Disciple]

But the hack itself is not warez, not breaking the LA and not something everyone would use..

again, you have to ask is it the higher ups that want to run everything for everybody, or is it the admins that have the licenses that run the boards that should be allowed to make their own decisions..

the decision to not allow the hack, as Miratos pointed out for vBhosting, as was the same for the lockdown hack, has generated more crap about either hack than what would have been generated by the thread for the hack alone..

i personally am all for jelsoft and making a buck or two.. but i have common sense and am well able to govern myself and my server and my vB license.. without the interference of vBulletin.org, vBulletin.com or Jelsoft proper, thank you very much.

[GameCrash]

FASherman, thanks for the heads up but it won't let me register at this time. If you could send me the hack though i'd apprecaite it.

SpeedStreet, thats fair enough but just cuz you won't does not mean others won't.

Thanks
Redistributing of this hack is not allowed by the hacks license. So nobody will send it to you. It's that simple...

[Kaelon]

i personally am all for jelsoft and making a buck or two.. but i have common sense and am well able to govern myself and my server and my vB license.. without the interference of vBulletin.org, vBulletin.com or Jelsoft proper, thank you very much.

It's important to note that the vBulletin license that you have purchased (or leased, if you went the leased route) comes with terms and conditions, among which are certain inherent proprietary rights that Jelsoft has in order to ensure that their software isn't being modified in order to adversely impact their sales. It makes perfect sense.

[SpeedStreet]

We seem to have alot of people posting, most with zero knowledge of how this hack works and even more so with little or no experience in copyright law.

It does not matter how much you "believe" that you should be in control of your own code. The simple and plain fact is that Jelsoft (and IPB and PHPBB) are only ALLOWING you to use their code. When you purchase a license, the company is allowing you to receive one version of their product under their rules and guidelines.

Jelsoft has every right to protect the integrity and reputation of their product. If they see the wind blowing in a way that could irrevocably damage their market brand, they can alter the agreement to protect themselves and their product.

This is ending badly. A few sour apples that think they know what is right and just are going to end up hurting us all. Jelsoft has many different options from this point forward, and yb asking for the community to comprise with them is far more than they really need to do.

Haven't you ever heard of something being a privilege, and not a right?

It is our privilege to be allowed to modify and hack the code of vBulletin as we see fit. How many other corporations would allow you to have everything their company is built upon, and say, "Here...now go make it unique for yourselves"

This is tremendous power and responsibility Jelsoft gives us. All they are asking for are some VERY minor adjustments in some of the hacks that we all create. Is that really such a monumental travesty that we have to go around and start discussing renegade hacking communities peppered with hacks specifically aimed at thumbing the nose at Jelsoft?

PLEASE. Take a deep breath, walk away from this thread, and in a few days come back to it and ask yourself what the cost/benefit of a site like vBulletin.org has. At its height (when I started here), you could get answers to hacking questions, see new hacks every day, and generally it was a fun place to go on my favorites list. Now, it has befallen a new generation of animosity and angst...Where everybody thinks they can do it better than the next guy.

[eXtremeTim]

Either way this is bullcrap. This is a nice hack and has plenty of good uses. I dont see why they have to start this kind of crap everytime there comes a hack that could be used for something controversial. The lockdown hack can also be used for good as well as this hack.

[13th_Disciple]

It's important to note that the vBulletin license that you have purchased (or leased, if you went the leased route) comes with terms and conditions, among which are certain inherent proprietary rights that Jelsoft has in order to ensure that their software isn't being modified in order to adversely impact their sales. It makes perfect sense.
and me using the lockdown hack to protect certain information or only allow certain information to be seen by fellow posters limits jelsofts income how, exactly?

me wanting vbhosting to allow mods of subforums to use custom colors and logo takes away from jelsofts profits how, exactly?

keep in mind, i don't charge folks for subforums.. nor have i ever, nor do i ever intend to.. i don't stiffle growth because it's the only thing in this world that, if stiffled, creates a dominant defeatist attitude.. that of which i do not have..

as far as intellectual property rights, law and the violation therein.. i don't know a great deal.. however, i know it's not my case to prove in court if someone comes after me.. the burden of proof lies within the case of the complaintant.. not the defendant.. that is a fact and some i do know with 100% certainty.. it would only be my job to defend myself..

[FASherman]

BUT: If Jelsoft is right, that this hack is breaking the License agreement, no other site is allowed to release this hack as well, as you're then supporting an illegal activity. So this whole discussion about another Hacking site because of this special topic here is irrelevant.

You are INCORRECT.

Even Jelsoft's lawyers - who work for Jelsoft and are paid to represent their point of view - are only expressing an OPINION.

We have had one lawyer on this board also render an OPINION that, in his experience, the hack does not violate the LA.

The only one who can STATE AS FACT that the hack violates the license agreement is a judge so Jelsoft's OPINION does not prohibit sany site from releasing the hack.

In fact, any site can release the hack NOW and Jelsoft's ONLY alternative is to file suit as their OPINION would be non-binding on any non-Jelsoft site. Then they have the burden of proving their case. In this particular instance, they're going to fall well short.

So please do not mislead people into thinking that Jelsoft's OPINION is anything other than that and that is in any way binding on any independent site.

[SpeedStreet]

Jelsoft has the right at any time to alter the license agreement in a retroactive fashion at which would render your theory wrong.

Additionally, and add-on or modification to the source code of vBulletin is subject to the same license agreement under International Copyright Law and therefore would be considered a violation of the LA.

Jelsoft has every right, and I would assume every intention, or protecting itself.

Yes, you could go run off and threaten a lawsuit, FASherman, but what would it accomplish? The destruction of vB? Them altering the flexible licensing agreement already in play?

It has been the benefit of the community to be able to use and modify vBulletin. Paying for a thing does not necessarily give you the right to destroy a thing.

[magnus]

FYI, Jelsoft cannot sue or bring any valid legal action against a site which carries/distributes the vBHosting hack. The hack itself does not violate the EULA. Only when the hack is applied to the source does it then violate the EULA. So, unless the site is distributing modified copies of the vBulletin source code, Jelsoft has absolutely no legal ground to stand on in the matter.

This same scenario applies to "cracks" for software programs. The crack in and of itself is no more legal or illegal than the program it modifies.

Just thought I'd point that out..

[Reeve of shinra]

The fact that Jelsoft is apparently consulting with lawyers tells everyone there's no chance in hell this hack is ever coming back, whether its legal or illegal.


I think I mentioned 10 or 15 pages ago that Jelsoft would have to consult thier attorney's regarding the hack regardless....

I dont think anyone here disagrees with the fact that the hack could potentially be misused. And I dont think anyone here has said that Jelsoft was not in thier rights to those would would in essence give out thier software for free....

This hack, given what it accomplishes, would need to have legal review it simply because if Jelsoft puts it back up with a note saying 'hey this hack is okay, have fun' ... it may jeopordize how they legally go after the real culprits.


Speedstreet makes a good point, one I tried to present as well. This is going nowhere fast, the same arguements are being re-hashed out again and again. The alternatives being discussed such as a new hacking community and lawsuits would ultimately do more harm than good.

At this point it appears that there are inreconciliable differences of opinion regarding this hack so the only thing to do at this point is wait for Jelsoft offical last word on it. If some feel that they must take thier business elsewhere, or create an alternative site for hacking, then so be it.

[Reeve of shinra]

FYI, Jelsoft cannot sue or bring any valid legal action against a site which carries/distributes the vBHosting hack. The hack itself does not violate the EULA. Only when the hack is applied to the source does it then violate the EULA. So, unless the site is distributing modified copies of the vBulletin source code, Jelsoft has absolutely no legal ground to stand on in the matter.

This same scenario applies to "cracks" for software programs. The crack in and of itself is no more legal or illegal than the program it modifies.

Just thought I'd point that out..


I dont have the hack but if the installation instructions contain Jelsoft code (which almost every hack does) then it would be a copyright violation.

[magnus]

I dont have the hack but if the installation instructions contain Jelsoft code (which almost every hack does) then it would be a copyright violation.
Agreed. But it's not hard to circumvent that, either. With proper wording, the instructions could be modified to be within legal boundaries.

* edit: It's also a matter of how much code is displayed in the instructions. Jelsoft doesn't "own" a routine, they own the program as a whole.

[FASherman]

Jelsoft has the right at any time to alter the license agreement in a retroactive fashion at which would render your theory wrong.

No, they don't. Whoever informed you of that is incorrect.

Additionally, and add-on or modification to the source code of vBulletin is subject to the same license agreement under International Copyright Law and therefore would be considered a violation of the LA.

Again, you aren't taking the full situation into consideration. You can't ignore past history. Taking a few hours to Google copyright law doesn't make you an expert. That fact that this site and others, such as vbulletin.nl and eVB, exist and distribute hacks would be considered implicit permission to the community at large. Selective enforcement is, in itself, a valid defense.

Jelsoft has every right, and I would assume every intention, or protecting itself.

No one disputes this. The question is whether their interests and mine coincide. If they do not, I have every right to protect myself and seek my best interests.

Yes, you could go run off and threaten a lawsuit, FASherman, but what would it accomplish? The destruction of vB? Them altering the flexible licensing agreement already in play?

Where are you getting this from? The only party that would have a need to initiate a lawsuit is Jelsoft.

It has been the benefit of the community to be able to use and modify vBulletin. Paying for a thing does not necessarily give you the right to destroy a thing.

You are so far off in left field that I'm not going to continue to discuss this with you. Your arguments are illogical and you ascribe actions and motives to people where none have been suggested or even implied.

[Thanatos]

The lockdown hacks policy is Jelsofts and it was imposed at the original hacking forum at vBulletin.com. It is used most of the time on warez boards for bad reasons, thus its not allowed.

So, they took a poll to find out it was mostly used on warez boards and for neferious purpose? or did they assume?

I mean, if they claim 'most of the time' they have facts and figures to back up that claim? or is it a proclamation from on high, just because it can be abused? in which case...they could claim that of any hack, what-so-ever...ban anything, for any reason..simply because it 'might' be abused on a warez board.

Hmmm. Well, I always do say, its good to be the King :)

Just goes to show..there needs to be a non-controlled vbhack's site.

[Zachery]

No, they don't. Whoever informed you of that is incorrect.



Again, you aren't taking the full situation into consideration. You can't ignore past history. Taking a few hours to Google copyright law doesn't make you an expert. That fact that this site and others, such as vbulletin.nl and eVB, exist and distribute hacks would be considered implicit permission to the community at large. Selective enforcement is, in itself, a valid defense.



No one disputes this. The question is whether their interests and mine coincide. If they do not, I have every right to protect myself and seek my best interests.



Where are you getting this from? The only party that would have a need to initiate a lawsuit is Jelsoft.



You are so far off in left field that I'm not going to continue to discuss this with you. Your arguments are illogical and you ascribe actions and motives to people where none have been suggested or even implied.
From the license agrement


Jelsoft reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.

[Thanatos]

From the license agrement

Speed pointed out that was a weak clause here:
https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showpost.php?p=489144&postcount=118

I also do not think that encompasses the ability to retroactively change the license agreement.

Anytime a LA changes, the end user still has to accept it...as evidenced by paypal or Everquest on a regular bases :)

[ManagerJosh]

Speed pointed out that was a weak clause here:
https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showpost.php?p=489144&postcount=118

I also do not think that encompasses the ability to retroactively change the license agreement.

Anytime a LA changes, the end user still has to accept it...as evidenced by paypal or Everquest on a regular bases :)
I think the only reason why Jelsoft doesn't want to go towards the ezBoard model is its complexity and lost of revenue. If this hacked had offered less control than an administrator, it would probably encourage users to get the full version of vBulletin rather than using a hosting solution.

More to a point, Kier is product manager and I don't think he felt this hack represented vBulletin properly.

This hack could violate another agreement, and that would be profiting. Imagine if someone charged money for hosting....and hosted a gazillion vBulletin hostees, well they would be profiting more than Jelsoft and that would be putting Jelsoft out of business.

A very similar idea/concept would be buying a single copy of Windows and installing it on a dozen computers.

That's basically what this hack is doing..

Having a person buy a single copy of vBulletin and having multiple individual UNIQUE boards running.

[FASherman]

From the license agrement

Yes, but that doesn't mean that it is in force once changed. A modified LA would apply to any new licenses sold after that date or any leased licenses upon renewal after the change. It would not EVER affect any owned licenses sold prior to the change.

[SpeedStreet]

Wrong again.

And after your comments, I refuse to partake in this discussion further. At this point FASherman, I consider your comments to be incindeary and out of line.

I am choosing to leave this discussion and I hope that those of you that have read my posts have found some sort of sense applied to them.

On a final note, I will say this: The laws binding this license agreement allow Jelsoft to apply changes retroactively to the license agreement. A license agreement is a rolling contract, whereas a Terms agreement when you purchase product cannot be applied at a later date.

You are free to try this in a court of law if you want, but in the past ten years, Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL and Real have had similar cases brought against them, and they have won them with resounding results. Therefore, precendent has been set.

[GameCrash]

A very similar idea/concept would be buying a single copy of Windows and installing it on a dozen computers.

That's basically what this hack is doing..
You don't really have any idea what this hack does, right?

[FASherman]

If this hacked had offered less control than an administrator, it would probably encourage users to get the full version of vBulletin rather than using a hosting solution.

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

The hack does not in any way, shape or form, offer admin access. That seems to be a common misconception.

More to a point, Kier is product manager and I don't think he felt this hack represented vBulletin properly.

There is no requirement that it should.

This hack could violate another agreement, and that would be profiting. Imagine if someone charged money for hosting....and hosted a gazillion vBulletin hostees, well they would be profiting more than Jelsoft and that would be putting Jelsoft out of business.

That does not violate the LA.

A very similar idea/concept would be buying a single copy of Windows and installing it on a dozen computers.


That's basically what this hack is doing.

No, it doesn't. You are misrepresenting the nature of the hack.


Having a person buy a single copy of vBulletin and having multiple individual UNIQUE boards running.

They are not unique. Riddle me this one, Batman...

Can they change the avatar policy for "their board"?
Can they change the attachment limitations for "their board"?
Can they change the PM policies for "their board"?
Can they change the calendar policies for "their board"?
Can they change any user attributes for "their board"?
Can they view user IP addresses on the posts in "their board"?
Can they hack "their board"?

No, they can't do any of those things, can they? They can't even email users. They can't archive threads. They have no access to the admin functions within a thread.

In short, they are not unique boards. Please, in the interest of honest, do not lie to folks who may not have seen the hack first hand and only have your misleading descriptions to rely upon.

ALL they can do is create a subforum or set of subforums and apply a style or set of styles. Plain and simple. Making this out to be a "unique board" is intellectually fraudulent.

[Wayne Luke]

This has gone far enough and is simply going in circles. We will continue discussing this with our lawyers and the business owners and at such a time that a decision is made, the original author of the hack will be contacted.