Why are hacks free?

[rnmcd]

I have started visiting vbulletin.org to look for hacks and I noticed that many of them exist but have some bugs or they don't exist for vB 3.5.

It's awesome that folks are kind enough to devote time to code hacks for free but why don't we pay for them?

I can bump a thread forever and ask when will be finished or when will the updated version for vB3.5 be available...but what if several of the people interested in the hack each paid $xx to the coder?

Wouldn't this get a better response?

I end up finding a freelance coder to develop the hack from me and it takes much longer because they don't understand the purpose/functionality of the hack.

What do you think about paying coders on this side for their hacks? I'll do it.

[Sean S]

well that's highly depended on the author of the hack. Also as far as my understanding for some of them, they simply don't want that because that they HAVE to give support to each individual that has paid for the hack, and sometimes that is imposible for them and ends up making everything worse. Some get really busy with family and life, and find it hard to come online and work or update what they have created, or if customers grew, then they have to increase support and that sometimes could make the costs even higher.

Another point is that some of these hacks are created by some who made the hack for their own use at their own website, and wanted to share it with others as well, so they might have no intension to give support for it or update it to the latest vb version if they don't need it for themselves, hope that makes sense.

There are alot of other reasons, but again it highly depends on the person that creates the hacks/mods. And believe me on this as well, money doesn't always resolve these issues, as I have paid many times before for different hacks/scripts and not getting the support that I should have get.

[Paul M]

There is nothing to stop you paying a coder if you so desire. I have converted a couple of hacks to 3.5 (privately) for a small fee. Most (if not all) will also accept "donations" for their hacks - and will modify one of their existing hacks to suit a particular persons requirements if the price is right.

[rnmcd]

Those are very good reasons that I had not considered.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by Paul M

There is nothing to stop you paying a coder if you so desire. I have converted a couple of hacks to 3.5 (privately) for a small fee. Most (if not all) will also accept "donations" for their hacks - and will modify one of their existing hacks to suit a particular persons requirements if the price is right.

Is it prohibited/improper/illegal to pay someone to modify/update someone else's hack?

[Paul M]

Originally Posted by rnmcd

Is it prohibited/improper/illegal to pay someone to modify/update someone else's hack?

Not if it's for your own private use (i.e. not released to anyone else).

[noppid]

Originally Posted by rnmcd

Is it prohibited/improper/illegal to pay someone to modify/update someone else's hack?

Oh the $64,000.00 question.

I'd say technically yes. If you upgraded notepad for win98 to a winxp version you'd be in trouble, right? I'd have to think the same applies. Counter arguments?

But let's say you do it once on the premise you are restoring expected functionality of an existing website and the author is not available. But does that superceed copyright? I bet it don't.

Then if you do it a second time, have you taken over the code and now committing a crime by essentially reselling working upgraded code someone else actaully has rights too?

Oh we walk a fine line it seems.

[rnmcd]

So what does a person do that wants an existing hack modified/updated and the original coder has no interest in doing it even for a fee?

[Zachery]

Originally Posted by noppid

Oh the $64,000.00 question.

I'd say technically yes. If you upgraded notepad for win98 to a winxp version you'd be in trouble, right? I'd have to think the same applies. Counter arguments?

But let's say you do it once on the premise you are restoring expected functionality of an existing website and the author is not available. But does that superceed copyright? I bet it don't.

Then if you do it a second time, have you taken over the code and now committing a crime by essentially reselling working upgraded code someone else actaully has rights too?

Oh we walk a fine line it seems.

I don't see it like that at all, the license that 99% of these hacks are released under is differnt than windows.

On this subject, most of the hacks are released here under such a license as you can do with the hack as you wish as long as you do not publicly republish the hack. Theres nothing wrong with updating the original hacks code (by whatever method, including paying someone else) to get it to work for 3.5.

I've updated and written code to work in 3.5 that doesn't work in 3.0, I also didn't release it to the public. I don't think the author cares, infact I know they didn't as I asked about releasing it to the public, in which case they said no.

[Zachery]

Originally Posted by rnmcd

So what does a person do that wants an existing hack modified/updated and the original coder has no interest in doing it even for a fee?

Find someone else who can code and pay them to do it.

[noppid]

Originally Posted by Zachery

I don't see it like that at all, the license that 99% of these hacks are released under is differnt than windows.

On this subject, most of the hacks are released here under such a license as you can do with the hack as you wish as long as you do not publicly republish the hack. Theres nothing wrong with updating the original hacks code (by whatever method, including paying someone else) to get it to work for 3.5.

I've updated and written code to work in 3.5 that doesn't work in 3.0, I also didn't release it to the public. I don't think the author cares, infact I know they didn't as I asked about releasing it to the public, in which case they said no.

You can't use an example of one time where you had permission to justify everyone else just taking over code and making a profit.

It's just not like the in the real world. Ask... Well, you know who.