|
If a coder has seemingly abandoned their plugin, and I've fixed it for 4.0
Can I post the newer version of the plugin in the 4.0 mod forum myself, or do I have to obtain permission even though they do not seem to be on the forums much anymore?
How do these sort of permissions and licenses work? |
Quote:
|
What if they don't even log on anymore?
|
Quote:
|
I think common sense prevails. If he doesnt even log in anymore, do whats good for the people. Post it. Then if he logs in and doesnt like that for some reason, which is highly doubtful, take it down. Id say 100% of the time he'd say thanks for updating it.
|
Quote:
|
If the coder in question did not say you can release the code, then you cannot. Its his code.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Check my profile, you'll see I recently released a UKBL mod HOWEVER in his original mod it stated "Re-Usable" code and if that is the case then you can i.e. the Yet Another Awards System originally by Hachno or Hancho I believe is now released by two other coders and I and someone else made a Ranks mod by doing so and in those cases it is fine, when they give permission beforehand. We have the option to choose if it's supported, re-usable code and many other options when coders post a modification. Always remember the the old saying about assumptions... I'll skip the latter but I would rather not be made out to appear that way because some would be quite upset and could take action into their own hands even after the staff here does based on their own forum rules. |
Every country on the planet recognizes that people die and when they do we give away their stuff to others. But not here! If you publish a single line of code, say "Hello World!" on vb.org, you then own it for eternity. Absurd, but apparently just never actually thought through by anyone except really paranoid coders (that were still alive).
|
Quote:
Just because a person has not logged into vB.org for some period of time does not mean that they relinquish their rights to anything that they may have created. For all you know they may have moved support to a different site. Or they are temporarily offline. Heck, who knows, maybe are a member of the military and just got shipped out (there are a good number of military folks in the vB community). If the vB.org admin's suddenly decide to open up the flood gates by allowing anybody to claim code from other people simply because the original coder has not logged in for some pulled-out-of-the-air amount of time, I would be willing to bet there would be an even further exodus of coders releasing add-ons here. Now, with that said, here's a question for for vB.org staff guys/gals.... I thought I read somewhere over the years that people who want to share their revisions to an older release can do so by just posting the attachment in the original release thread (as opposed to creating a new thread & essentially assuming ownership of the code)? That way situations like this are avoidable. |
Quote:
|
But this isnt a book. Its a code that is not being updated. Its like someone builds a bridge across a river, but after the river gets wider due to global warming, no one wants to extend the bridge because the architect is dead. And no one knows how to build a new bridge. But we cant extend it even though he's dead or unreachable.
Also, isnt the quote feature copyright infringement? lol --------------- Added [DATE]1269711271[/DATE] at [TIME]1269711271[/TIME] --------------- (FYI) if its the rule, then its the rule, just posting for discussion purposes, no one take it the wrong way) |
Previously, people posted the changed in the original thread (similiar to how some mods here say change "this code here" in the default vbfile.php with "this other code here")
If however the mod is marked off with the reusable code, then the owner already gave permission for others to use their work. |
Quote:
|
note that I'm fine with not posting it, but I feel bad for all the people out there who can use it...
however, isn't it even recognized in US Copyright Law that after you change a certain percentage, it becomes a different enough product to not fall under the copyright of the previous work anymore? Just food for thought... I think that if I have theoretically changed 75% of the code to make it work in vb4, but still wanted to post it under the same name for recognition, I should be able to. Note that I'm not claiming I've changed that much... more like 20% and 50% for the two mods I've updated. But I just wanted to throw that in there for the debate :) |
Doesn't copyright have to be explicitly stated? Like it is at the bottom of this page?
|
Can you start anew with the coding?
|
I have two questions.
What if the coding is very close to being the same without looking at the original? What if the coder is dead? (I am saying this in respects to the one spam mod that is amazing, but unfortunately we lost that coder to a tragic accident.) I am no coder, but just curious. |
I think the percentage changed argument may be valid.
|
Quote:
But we're confusing the issue by trying to compare software routines to music or books. i.e., There's only so many ways to say "Hello World!" in PHP, so nobody can be expected to change x% of the code before using it. We've all been flabbergasted at recent software patent infringement suits - like Apple claiming all mouse routines, or someone claiming to own all .gifs. But as ridiculous as that is, those are properly registered patents, not just a modification to existing code. In the case of abandoned mods here, no patents or copyright registration has been obtained. It's simply a rule that prevents re-use. Rules can be changed. And it's certainly in VB's best interest to have a thriving mod community, rather than one that finds itself increasingly restricted to fewer and fewer mods that can only accomplish their objective with wild code workarounds. What's so wrong about simply changing the rule to read "If you disappear for more than six months your code will automatically become reusable"? Where is this rule codified anyway, because honestly I don't know if that isn't what it says already. |
No ones saying you couldn't code a similiar modification, you just can't update and release their code.
|
Dude post it who cares if it's sombody elses.. Obiously if they don't go on anymore.. That's because they don't care bout it... Like Nike says.... Just do it!!
|
Quote:
it should be a given that mods posted freely for vb on these boards are open source and can be freely modified and re-released. why should I have to recode something completely to release it to my fellow users when I can just update what someone else has already done? so I've fixed 2 mods for vb4, but you guys would rather I keep this work to myself than share it with an open source community if they were coding these for money, that's a different story. however they're not, and they're posting this free for vb users. I will respect your rules but I think they need modifying |
Quote:
Posting copyrighted material without permission of the original author is taken serious and will often result in infractions. Copyright rules are not a site rule, they are international law. Any original work of art (and this includes code) is automatically copyrighted. If a person is still visiting our site, still alive or not doesn't make any difference. |
as a non coder and a user, if someone shares the Mod privately, I don't see a problem; Publishing somebody's code to the public is a no no
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If any coder wants to do that then they can mark their mod as Re-Usable, otherwise you need their permission. Thats the law, whether you like it or not. |
The last i checked, you cannot copyright a language. HTML/PHP is a coding language. You also cannot copyright the format of of the mod. IE the end result, etc.
In reality, this is just a VB rule to allow coders rights to their mod. I agree with the "dead mod" rule which would allow someone else to take over the mod when the user has not updated it within a year period. I was having a hard time find supporting laws that Marco stated. In fact, i did not find any copyright laws that mention copyrights on coding and scripting language. I also could not find specific coding such as PHP/HTML/etc categorized as "art." Marco please post references when making statements regarding international law. From the U.S. Copyright law - "(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work" http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#101 http://www.rpi.edu/dept/llc/webclass...p5/format.html |
Quote:
The copyright covers the actual mod itself, the intellectual property, the code written to make the whole. If you want to write a mod that does an identical job but written in a markedly different way then you'll have no copyright worries. If you copy the code verbatim you are breaking the law even if you write it all out by hand yourself. Ask Microsoft if it minds you distributing DOS or Windows3.11, both obsolete, they surely wouldn't mind.... Edit: You wanted cites.... Have a look at this US software copyright attorney website which puts in laymans terms how software is protected internationally http://www.softwareprotection.com/copyright.htm Jeff. |
You can copyright a release of code, but you can not copyright the objective of said code or the method in which it is achieved.
If this were true, there would only be one forum software written for php. So nothing is stopping people from taking an abandoned mod, studying it, and making an improved/updated version using the concepts the original describes. There no technology patents in question here so it's not like reverse engineering an iPhone and having apple chase after you. So why not make a better version of a mod instead of changing a few lines of code? Too lazy? Don't do it. |
Quote:
PHP is a method of operation. Quote:
|
Does it matter that these mods are free, and not being changed and re sold, but given away free?
Like if I post a cool html code, and someone says, hey, I added an extra html code to it to add an extra table, here it is, ... actually, I just realized that happens on all the mods here in the discussions under the mod thread. So looks like if he doesnt release it as a seperate post, but just posts under the original thread, as a "hey, I updated this for 4.0, here it is.." is this not happening through out the site already? |
I don't think arguing the copyright issue is something vb.org wants to do, or needs to do. The issue here is stagnant mods - they're clearly a problem and they're something I believe vb.org DOES need to try and get a handle on and discourage.
While the developers quite rightly want the popularity of their mod reflected in installed counts and ratings ("no support without clicking installed"), there is no incentive or disincentive whatsoever for a developer to indicate "Supported" on his/her new modification - even if they have no intention of ever supporting it. That needs to change. While users are provided encouragement and incentives to mark a developer's modification "installed", developers are under no similar obligations to their users. I think developers who abandon their modifications or fail to provide support on "supported" modifications after X period of time should earn strikes against that mod, reflected in the mod and the developer's profile. Almost like an eBay-style buyer-beware, if Developer A releases a three "supported" mods and then abandons his/her installed base, they earn strikes against their mods that provide fair warning to the community of the developer's reputation. That way, even if Developer A releases a killer hack, people may be reluctant to download and install it in their production environments if that Developer's support/activity rating is in the tank. Installed/downloaded counts simply don't tell that story - they only tell us how big the problem can be. |
Quote:
There have been other cases of this: the numerous vB index pages in vB2/3 (MyvBIndex, vBindex, etc), Quick replys (numerous), Welcome Panels, Shoutboxes. Every few years we see new people with the same idea's doing their own things, no one is stoping them from doing their own things. What we (the community) are doing is saying you can't take their code (legally) and release it as your own. You can take their code and update it for yourself, nothing stoping you at all on this level. If you release a modification that copys the concept, no one around here is likely to go all crazy and sue you*. Hopefully the two authors will fuel each other to make better code, features, etc or they can work together to do the same. You won't be the first, or last to do it. If you see a mod that has been abandoned and really want to help, write a new addon to take place of the old one. *It hasn't happened yet anyway. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Supported means different things to different users, Geeky Designs supports its modifications by fixing bugs, we don't currently go out of our way to support everything every user asks. One last thing to add: People here write addons because they wanted to, wrote it for themselfs, wrote it for a client who wanted to release it. Releasing an addon here doesn't pay our bills, or tuck us in bed at night. There are 168 hours in the week, 64 of these are likely consumed by sleep. This now leaves us with 104 workable hours for the week. Assuming we work a normal 9-5 job, or at the very least 40 hours a week we're down to 64 hours. How much time do you propose an author spends on vBulletin.org suppoorting their modifications that they are not paid to support? This 64 hours that are left assumes no commute time, no family time, no time to cook food or take showers, or do daily chores. |
I can see how some have different perceptions and opinions on this however it's rather simple to understand, arguing a point on the other hand leads to 3 pages :p
1) You can't copy the code 100% and find/replace the creators name with yours not even 99% (unless they marked it as "Re-Usable code" as previously posted). 2) You can have a similar idea and code your own version of a mod up as long as the majority of it differs as some things you can't simply recode for instance an actual php function (http://www.w3schools.com/PHP/php_functions.asp) may have to be called with the same code but a writename does not always have to call the name "John Doe" now does it? Nope ;) 3) Just be respectful, that's why someone became ticked off and invented copyrights... someone flat our jacked their idea and did not give credit... innovation by instinct on the other hand is always welcome as long as it's a new and different way to make the world turn. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:27 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.12 by vBS
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
| X vBulletin 3.8.12 by vBS Debug Information | |
|---|---|
|
|
 More Information |
|
|
Template Usage:
Phrase Groups Available:
|
Included Files:
Hooks Called:
|