Ethical Question

[RMS-Chef]

We all should know about the whole Ravio situation. The false pretenses that their styles were sold on as well as the flat out thievery that took place.

I have converted 3 of my Ravio styles over to vB3 (RavioBlue, neXusBlue & Emerge) for my personal use. Although due to my limited skills, they are not a 100% conversion but still very nice looking skins and I would say about 80%-90% of the original vB2 versions. I had some issues mostly getting the postbits to look exactly the same so I made some compromises but I think they are still great looking. Since then, I have had a couple of my buddies ask to purchase the conversions from me.

I will sell these to my friends and people who know me due to the way Ravio ended up doing things although I know it's not entirely correct to do so.

So, my question is this. What do you folks think about this, ethics wise. Do you think that if I started advertising that the average person would freak out and attempt to exile and banish me due to my actions? When I purchased the styles it was stated clearly that I was purchasing a vB2 style and that as soon as vB3 went Gold that I would have a vB3 version available for download. And lets not even go into how many thousands of dollars were flat out stolen for uncompleted contract work by Ravio.

Now, I am an adult and I know at face value it would not be entirely legal but under the circumstances at hand how bad is it to sell my conversions?

[Tony G]

I think it's a bit cheesy to be selling, effectively, somebody elses work, regardless of what happened in the past with Ravio. That's just my opinion.

[imported_Nikki]

I don't think it would be a good idea to sell them since it's not your work even though you have converted them, but if you wanted to give them away that might be different since you're not profiting off of someone else's work.

I'm unsure of the legalities of it all but that's just my take on it.

[RMS-Chef]

I have no doubt it's not legal in that sence. And the three people who I have sold it to so far were buddies of mine who I know for a fact had already purchased the vB2 versions like myself. Therefore, up until now, I can honetly say that I have only taken money for the time spent converting.

Again, thanks for the opinions so far.

[Brad]

It really depends on what you agreed to when you downloaded/bought these styles, I am sure there is something in there that said you could not re-sell them.

I don't see a problem selling a copy to someone that bought the vB2 version, in my mind you are just charging these guys for the time you spent converting the style. But I am not the copyright holder of this work. So if you agreed to something that said you could not do this, and the copyright holder found and and wanted to sue you he might have a case.

[RMS-Chef]

Yes I understand what you are saying.

My main argument is that they broke their end of the agreement to offer the vB3 version to me as part of my purchase so why should I uphold my end? Seems to me that Ravio blatantly broke the agreement therefore making it null and void?

[Chris Gwynne]

It was never in the contract that they would update. They simple said you'll get free update when it goes Gold. No actual promises were made.

[tgillespie]

I would say that if you know for a fact that the person has purchased the vB2 version of the Ravio skin, you should be able to sell the converted vB3 to them. However, if no contract what so ever was signed with Ravio and the person considering buying your services, I would definately say no.

[MyvB8MyIPS]

Originally Posted by a-drive

They simple said you'll get free update when it goes Gold. No actual promises were made.

It doesn't matter if they actually promised it or not, as long as it was directly implied! This is the same reason why there are bait and switch laws. You cannot lead a person to believe one thing, and then do another. A seller cannot lead another person to believe they will receive a product at a certain time, and then not deliver it. If it was implied that updates would be available, and then at a later time they were not made available, then the seller has broken the contract and it is void, and at that point the buyer has a right to recoup their losses. As far as the OP's question, I would say give the part that you bought away for free, and then charge for the parts that you put time in to fix/update or whatever you want to call it, to recoup your losses.

[RMS-Chef]

Originally Posted by MyvB8MyIPS

It doesn't matter if they actually promised it or not, as long as it was directly implied! This is the same reason why there are bait and switch laws. You cannot lead a person to believe one thing, and then do another. A seller cannot lead another person to believe they will receive a product at a certain time, and then not deliver it. If it was implied that updates would be available, and then at a later time they were not made available, then the seller has broken the contract and it is void, and at that point the buyer has a right to recoup their losses.

Those were my thoughts exactly. And they are for sale.