The Ethics of Updating for VB3 a VB2 Hack That You Didn't Write

[Wayne Luke]

Originally Posted by KuraFire

It does if you're not trying to act like you made / wrote it.

It really doesn't matter how you act. It is illegal in most countries in this world. Not being able to contact the author is not an excuse.

[Thanatos]

From an opposing view, and I realize I don't have a post count, the ability to code/post hacks or anything else to garner respect, but...

People use others original work in a variety of situations in the real world, updating it and give proper credit to the original creator of the works. There don't seem to be any ethics issues there. I fail to see how this is any different.

As long as no profit is being made off of it, the original creator has no intention to update the code or is unable to be contacted and proper credit is being given in the update, how and why would it be considered unethical?

And saying, write your own code from scratch is not an acceptable answer. Not everyone is capable of coding. In my opinion, that is a very narrow minded and elitest attitude.

I'm not trying to be a troll...but undestand there are features out there that people need and not everyone is blessed with the ability to program and so are at the mercy of those who can. These people deserve consideration as much as the ones who can take that old program and update it for their boards.

If the original author comes back from the nether and gets offended, take down the updated code and let the updater and original author work out terms.

Anyway, thats my opinion.

[MindTrix]

Well i dont exactly have a post count etc like you say, I dont think i have ANY respect on this site but that doesnt bother me, i try to do what i can where i can.

As for the coding aspect i see your point, i too cannot create a hack from scratch because simply i have no idea where to start

But i guess i need to keep learning.

[KuraFire]

Originally Posted by Wayne Luke

It really doesn't matter how you act. It is illegal in most countries in this world. Not being able to contact the author is not an excuse.

Right, so all the publications of Shakespeare's works are illegal?


Back on topic, in some cases it's just completely pointless to say "you should rewrite this hack from scratch" - look at the hack I ported to vB3, Miserable Users. I simplified it, made it up to date with vB's changes in version 3, made it a little bit more efficient, and added a bunch of explanations/how-to's on toning down the miserabe-aspect. Rewriting that hack would be pointless as there aren't a whole lot of ways to do a very, very basic IF condition...
With something like a Journal System, ie. something BIG, I can imagine that you'd say "write your own from scratch!" (unless, of course, you have prior permission from the original author to port his/her hack) and I would agree to that, but it definitely doesn't always apply.

[Wayne Luke]

Originally Posted by KuraFire

Right, so all the publications of Shakespeare's works are illegal?

Actually, no... Copyright expires. Currently this is about 70 years after creation in most places, some make it a specified time after the author's death. Common rule of thumb though is that if it was published before 1920, then copyright has expired.

Copyright is also immediate and automatic. When you republish another hack maker's work you are breaking their copyright since it hasn't been published for 70 years yet.

Go ahead and laugh... Break the law if you want. I will be willing to testify if anyone wants to pursue damages which includes fines up to $25,000 dollars and ten years in prison in the United States. Plus copyright violation is a felony covered by extradition in over 100 countries.

[Zachery]

* Faranth runs to mexico

[Logician]

From legal point of view I can confirm Wayne's explanations are 100% true.

It does not matter whether you pretend it is your code or not. It does not matter whether you mentioned it belongs to someone else. It does not matter whether it was a paid or free script. It is a violation of copyright unless:
a) You get permission of the author.
b) Author explicitly allowed the action beforehand (eg. in his code he mentioned it can be imported, ported, distributed etc.)
c) It is not copyrighted in the first place as author explicitly rendered it this way.
d) Its copyright expired according to relevant law. (applies after long years)

[GuruXL]

Originally Posted by Miratos

From an opposing view, and I realize I don't have a post count, the ability to code/post hacks or anything else to garner respect, but...

People use others original work in a variety of situations in the real world, updating it and give proper credit to the original creator of the works. There don't seem to be any ethics issues there. I fail to see how this is any different.

As long as no profit is being made off of it, the original creator has no intention to update the code or is unable to be contacted and proper credit is being given in the update, how and why would it be considered unethical?

And saying, write your own code from scratch is not an acceptable answer. Not everyone is capable of coding. In my opinion, that is a very narrow minded and elitest attitude.

I'm not trying to be a troll...but undestand there are features out there that people need and not everyone is blessed with the ability to program and so are at the mercy of those who can. These people deserve consideration as much as the ones who can take that old program and update it for their boards.

If the original author comes back from the nether and gets offended, take down the updated code and let the updater and original author work out terms.

Anyway, thats my opinion.

I feel I have to agree with Miratos, not everyone is able to learn how to become a programmer, be it because of a learning disability or just a general lack of grasping the principles and methods behind coding.

However, I can see what you mean regarding copyright. Again I agree with Miratos because, I believe copyright law needs to be re-written, for starters its too strict, the slightest similarity to something else is considered copyright infringement and plagerism. Plagerism is seriously strict it requires you to come up with something original and that is becoming more and more difficult as plagerism cases increase. The ability to come up with something original is hard because we have so many works that have already been published or written. Plagerism is defined as:

take without referencing from someone else's writing or speech; of intellectual property

this is tricky still because of all the versions of plagerism.

All of the following are considered plagiarism:

- turning in someone else's work as your own
- Changing the words of an original source is not sufficient to prevent plagiarism. If you have retained the essential idea of an original source, and have not cited it, then no matter how drastically you may have altered its context or presentation, you have still plagiarized.
- copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
- failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
- giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
- changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
- copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Kinda of seriously limits a person who is trying to come up with something "original", Regardless of copyright law.

[amykhar]

I take strong exception to what Miratos said. Somebody who cannot code has no business releasing a hack in the first place - especially not somebody else's work. If you don't have the talent or ability to do something, you certainly don't have the right to represent yourself as somebody who can based on the efforts of others.

[Erwin]

Feel free to download a hack and modify for your own forums. But don't re-release it and call it your own.