[FASherman]

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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

Sure I do.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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

That is their choice. They precipitated this situation.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

... 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.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

...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.

Originally Posted by SpeedStreet

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.