Policy on unsupported hacks?

[joeychgo]

Well, thats basically what happens now. What we need is some way to make abandoned hacks that dont work with current version of vB to be able to be converted without stepping on the toes of the hack creator.

Thats called a win win.

[Paul M]

Please note that if this thread starts going in the direction of suggesting people steal other members work then it will be closed.

As I understand it, the facts of copyright law are that the author owns the work and vb.org cannot change that law to suit itself. Even if we introduced some new policy in the future that included such conditions as are being suggested here (as part of your agreement to release here) - it could not be applied to any existing modifications without the agreement of the original author.

(No, I'm not a legal expert, so if any lawers out there know better then feel to post).

[joeychgo]

I dont think anyone was suggesting the theft of anyone elses work. I know im not.

[rjmjr69]

I was not suggesting theft. Abandoned property becomes the beholders at some point in time. Not sure if you could apply it to code but if you were to include it as a written clause and or RULE of the membership then I would be willing to bet thats enough. But as Paul said I'm not a lawyer would be nice if one could chime in on this.

[Dream]

This is an interesting discussion.

People rely too much in modifications released here in my opinion. You shouldn't count on modifications posted here as being eternal, and you should know you may not have the modification working tomorrow.

If you really want to do something about it, place an option checkbox on mods that say if the user authorizes people to modify and re-release their mods. I know I would have no problem with someone updating my mod if I'm busy in another place. Of course, if I'm around, it would be rude for someone to update my mods before asking me.

A notice in the mod thread "this mod can be modified and re-released" would be cool. And it could be another reason for you to install the mod, as you know if the mod author vanishes from vB.org someone else can take over.

As for the older stuff, I'm sorry but it's your fault for having modified your board so much.

[joeychgo]

Originally Posted by Dream

Of course, if I'm around, it would be rude for someone to update my mods before asking me.

A notice in the mod thread "this mod can be modified and re-released" would be cool. And it could be another reason for you to install the mod, as you know if the mod author vanishes from vB.org someone else can take over.

As for the older stuff, I'm sorry but it's your fault for having modified your board so much.

Certainly it would be more then rude, and I would be the first to back you up. - but for my part, I have only been talking about hacks that have been abandoned and the author cannot be reached or does not respond.

As fas as the notice - thats not a bad idea.

As far as it being our fault for modifying a board so much. It doesnt have to be much. It could be just one hack. Past that - why should it really matter. The whole reason for this site is because vB gives a basic platform. Customizing a community is part of what makes it unique. I know of very few successful forums that have not customized to some extent.

In my case, I earn enough from my forums to hire someone to make something custom or make something work properly. But most forum owners are not so fortunate. I guess for me its a 2 way street. I am very grateful to hack authors who donate their creations. Its what I think makes vB the best platform.

But, I believe we have to also be mindful of the forum owner as well and realize that they come to depend on some hacks as important features for their communities. Just telling them 'too bad' - well - is kinda one sided. I dont see why a way to server both interests couldnt be reached.

[Dream]

The code (made on the coder's free time in most cases) is property of the author. Anyone could recode it, as long as he don't use the author's code.

[da420]

Originally Posted by Dream

People rely too much in modifications released here in my opinion. You shouldn't count on modifications posted here as being eternal, and you should know you may not have the modification working tomorrow.

A notice in the mod thread "this mod can be modified and re-released" would be cool. And it could be another reason for you to install the mod, as you know if the mod author vanishes from vB.org someone else can take over.

I agree with you. This is a large problem, and we all run into it. I'm certainly no pro coder, and I will say I have lost a few modifications along the way. But, I uninstall and move on, fix it, or find someone who can fix it. This should be the forum administrators responsibility in my eyes, not the owner of the modifications, nor should it be their obligation to allow people to take their code and re-release it.

Also, your suggestion is a good idea. I hope vbulletin.org takes it into consideration. I think it would have to be more thought out though - of course.

Originally Posted by RedTyger

One way I can think of would be to give the option for users who have installed a supported modification to nominate it as unsupported if they aren't getting any support. After X votes, it sends an email to the author asking if they're still supporting it and if not, could they change the supported tag. If there's no response (to the email or in the thread) from the author then the change is automatically made.

This is also a good idea.

Originally Posted by Paul M

As I understand it, the facts of copyright law are that the author owns the work and vb.org cannot change that law to suit itself. Even if we introduced some new policy in the future that included such conditions as are being suggested here (as part of your agreement to release here) - it could not be applied to any existing modifications without the agreement of the original author.

From my understanding, they'd pretty much have to give vbulletin.org ownership of their code (permission to re release it would probably do, but it just seems to me like a sticky situation and a bit sketchy - legal or not). I am not a lawyer or legal adviser either, but that's the only way it would make sense to me, and I think that would turn a few coders off, if not, a lot.

Another thing to consider, is once it's up for grabs is it only allowed to re release here or other vbulletin websites? I can see that causing a headache as well, as even if the policy is only here, there will be many that won't realize or won't care and will release it elsewhere. I've seen this happen elsewhere, so it's not only isolated to this, but this would make it a more common place I would think.

[Regs]

My understanding is that any coder can make his/her modification with a GPL (or derivative of) license. That can happen now, always could happen. The coder would just need to state as such in the description of the mod posted here.

The only thing vb.org could really do is to help make it easier for coders to (1) select/state this option; (2) make it easier for a coder (or coders) to contribute code/modifications/images/documentation to the submitted 'hack'.

I would imagine the upcoming official project tools plugin would be somewhat useful in this regard?

Anyways, just my thoughts and to be selfish, I would like to see vbookie be the first mod to switch over to this with the original author's consent

Cheers,

~Regs.

[Wayne Luke]

GPL wouldn't really work as vBulletin isn't GPL itself. AS no code released on this site stands on its own and works without vBulletin, you can't release it under GPL according to their site. LGPL would work. As would derivatives of it such as the BSD License, and Mozilla License. However it would still be the Author's choice as they could also use a standard EULA with a no modification and distribution clause.