Not Supported = Abandoned
 

maybe its just me but i feel if a hack (mod) is selected as not supported it should really be free for someone else to pick up where it was left off, giving props to the original creator pf course

seems like such a waste to have a great idea be stuck at an earlier version of vb cuz the original creator either cant or wont update it

i mean we do allow addon mods

You run into the copyright issue with that.

and what about "abandonware" ?!... someone who stop supporting his work would fall into it, isn't it?!

Not Support is not the same as abandoning the mod. And, it would be against copyright laws.

that was debated before, anyway... if the coder is not tagging his release as abandonned, nothing can be done.

but it would be just good to have that process... if someone abandon a hack, someone else can become the new supporter of it when possible... it's done privately in the Coders forum, but few are sharing...

Contributors can mark their code as "Reusable Code" which means it can be taken up by someone else and umm.. Reused. Should look for that instead of whether it is supported or not.

a FAQ page available for possible versions of licenses for vb.org would be good, so we can tag the releases the right way...

not if this forum/site states in the rules anything posted here becomes the property of jelsoft

Until/unless the author oks it, it is copyrighted to them. Jelsoft doesn't have any claim on it.

Then you will get a lot less hacks/modifications posted here. If a mod was that 'popular' then I'm sure someone would take over it. If it is less popular, and you're not a coder, then you can always make a post in the Modfication requests (unpaid) or request for paid services forum.

hum, guys, copyleft, you know?!... everything coded with vB code in it can't have a different copyright than vBulletin until you state it in a seperate license... so until further change from all the releases here, your code follow the copyright applied to vBulletin

well, what about an option when releasing, like there is for not supported/supported for members to select ppl can modify this

something like that

you never give up Uh?

although Copyright Law is very subjective here, we must learn to respect each other works

It already exists... Read my post above.

Of course people can always release their addons under the LGPL, Mozilla or BSD style licenses or the Creative Commons License. They would have to state that in their release though. GPL wouldn't work because its viral and would be against the vBulletin license agreement.

All my hacks are marked as "unsupported" although I believe I support them QUITE well.

"Unsupported" in my terminology means: "I'm sharing this free hack for the sake of the community and will try to assist as much as possible but please don't confuse this application with something you are a paid customer and be understanding when asking help instead of being demanding and impatient."

So let's not try to give this completely different meaning like "abondoned" which definetely is not. There are a lot of very advanced hack released here and changing a policy in the site, does not give anybody legal right to claim anything on their code without coder's consent.

If you think some good hacks are lost in the dust, why don't you simply code your own versions of them. ;)

Hey, buddy! ;)

'Supported' should be that an author give to the installers some upgrades, obviously if his/her hack begin obsolete (Jelsoft releases an update per month), also should be that if an installer has a trouble he/she can give a hand to who has troubles .... we can translate supported in 'help' for the members ;)

this means 'supported' (in italian 'supportato') ... but sometimes we had some add-on that are marked with the 'V' logo, but in realty we haven't any support from the author, maybe the community needs a better control over this by the Crew of this Site ... repeat: maybe :)

ill give a good example, the mod "browser on whos online" it has a serious problem and needs to be updated, but the maker doesnt seem interested, so i dunno, i would think its better to let someone else than let it fall to a graveyard

https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showthread.php?t=133784

That's not necessarily the case... I list several of my addons as not-supported because I don't guarantee to support them. When the supported icon was on I'd get messages from people upset that I hadn't responded in hours... without out there's a little more forgiveness. In no way are these addons not being developed or used, I simply don't make promises I won't keep. By the same token, there's a lot of great mods out there with supported checked that don't get support... as time elapses, things change and people get busy. What they checked on a form doesn't really tell where they stand a year later.

And then there's boneheads like Boofo...

I guarantee that if that was implemented quite a few authors would pull their already released hacks off this site and I know me personally I wouldn't even consider releasing any of the code that I make for my sites which I have already started to release little pieces of it over the last few days.

When you write code for vbulletin you have to adhere to the license agreement. Your new additional code does not implicitly fall under the vBulletin Copyright and is free to be copyrighted by the author with ease. That is the nature of online development. As the code is the property of its creator and as such he has the rights to it. Now the functions the code may utilize such as core vb functions are the property of Jelsoft but not the additional code / concept created by modification authors. Check any online community as that has been the general consensus given for most major modification communities. As for having to have a separate license file to be able to copyright it this is not true. You can copyright it using quite a few different methods as long as it is stated somewhere what the copyright terms are. As its the user who is working with the copyrighted material's responsibility to make sure they aren't breaking your license agreement or the copyright that you implemented. It would then after that be my job or somebody who I give the power to act on my behalf to enforce the copyright / license and handling people who are breaking the terms set forth (Such as DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act)).

We aren't here to force users to update their modifications.

Usually if a modification is popular enough and worth using then problems that arise in it can typically have a patch or some code changes posted in the thread to help people out who are having the problems. I know I have been releasing minor patches to quite a few mods I have been working with lately to help the author out as well as the users in the meantime while we wait on the original author to update it. As for it going to the graveyard I believe that is usually reserved for mods that authors have pulled as well as modifications that have had security exploits found in them where it is unsafe to let them be used all over the internet (correct me if im wrong here).

------Some more thoughts I had after I wrote that reply------

Im just amazed at how some people take the coders right for granted and the fact that we were kind enough to release the code in the first place when we just could have held onto it. If you dont like the fact that a coder may not update his work and it may just sit there then try to get ahold of him and find out if you can get the rights to have somebody update it. Not to mention coders have lives to. We aren't hear to just provide you with stuff you want just because you want it. We create concepts and code them out whether it be a concept we developed for our site or something we were hired to make or something we made out of generosity for the community, and these concepts have our names attached to them as well as took our time to make them. Now yes sometimes we have things in life that come up and we may not update a mod for quite some time or we may change focus of what we are working on to focus on more important things such as client work or additional code modifications that we need ourselves. When this happens after a while its reasonable to want to take over one of these mods but there is a proper way todo this and that would involve contacting the original author as only he can wave the rights he owns over the code and thats how it should be. He may chose to let you have the rights to the code or he may very well say no. I know I am very picky about what code of mine I give the rights away on even if its for say a modification that I havent updated in say 6 months as I may just not have had time to update it and still have plans to update the code and since I already spent so much time on the work why would I want to give somebody else the work when i have every intention on updating it again and don't like the idea of my code being taken over by others for a few reasons (see list below).

Reasons Coders Chose not to give rights away to code they have created:
1) I created it and plan on updating it (this usually means the coder is extremely busy)
2) I don't want just anybody taking over my code as it has my name attached to it and there are quite a few coders out there that don't write code that I would call Clean, Easy to understand (self documenting, well structured code), Optimized, and or Secure code.
3) I spent a considerable amount of time on it and may feel that there are currently no updates which I need to make at the time.
4) Not saying I wont give you the rights if I trust you will do good things with the code I have created and know that you will give credit where credit is due.

and finally the most important

5) I created it and its my code to do what I want with.


If you ever want to take over a modification from somebody and they say no or are unreachable you should have the knowledge and ability to create the mod from scratch so feel free to make a new one but it has to be your own code (dont reference the original in the process of making it as then you aren't creating your own ideas for it). If you don't have the talent to make the modification from scratch then you shouldn't even be asking to take it over.

Yes, you are correct. They are also removed if they violate vBulletin.org Rules.

Thank you for confirming that and I also should have mentioned that but I forgot as I was in math class so thank you for pointing that out. :)

It really doesn't matter in the end as a user can take a hack, add a few options, rename a few variables and release it as their own, which has happened to me in the past.

Yes it does matter as doing so is unethical as well as illegal in most countries as it violates copyright acts that most countries have in place.

I know I am always on the lookout for it and don't hesitate to send out a DMCA abuse notification to users who are abusing the content copyright for code of mine. Which most countries are more then willing to help enforce (Sweden not included as their laws are still a subject I am researching since I know with careful distribution in Sweden the law will help protect you (example: piratebay (I wont list the url here since its a torrent site but im sure most of you have probably heard about it))).

Let's not turn this discussion into past occurrences with your hacks.

You mean past and present.

Yes, they should be discussed in private with Staff.

Been there, done that. Got nowhere. ;)

It is still the only way these things should be done. Now we will get back onto the subject of the thread.

I never got off topic as I stand by that statement that it doesn't matter if code is not going to be protected.

This is off topic as the topic of this thread is abandoned modifications.

And to give a response to your issue: You have been told that the issue will be discussed with staff as it is not an easy issue. Your response to this has been to start a rant and file a formal complaint with Jelsoft. The decission on your copyright complaint is now on hold until your complaint with jelsoft has been handled.

Closing this thread as some people don't want to understand the word Off-Topic.