Dumped in an inconvenient situation

[Spank]

Maybe someone should start an 'open source' hack community.

[Dream]

Originally Posted by MRGTB

Not sure a checkbox would work that way. I'm guessing the checkbox would give the coder an "option". And most coders replies here indicate they would not allow it .

Yeah well, the problem is that vb.org is not an open source community, and it doesn't look like it will become one.

Don't get me wrong, I understand what your concerns are. Maybe spank is right and someone should do an open source mod community.

Mods stopping being updated to newer vb versions is one of the reasons I don't install all mods in the mods forum. And you guys should have started taking that into consideration about now. That's the reason I won't install that new points modification (well that and the branding on all vb pages that takes $60 to remove which is atrocious).

If I would participate in an open source community, I don't know, maybe. Maybe I would release stuff both here and there. But it would need at least the same features this community has for me to consider it, and license verification.

Maybe the checkbox should be "Is this mod Open Source?".

[Dean C]

Originally Posted by Dream

If I would participate in an open source community, I don't know, maybe. Maybe I would release stuff both here and there. But it would need at least the same features this community has for me to consider it, and license verification..

People put a lot of hard work into some of their modifications. Why shouldn't they ask for a link in the footer in return?

[Dream]

They can, but I won't install it on my forum. Especially on all forum pages.

A seo solution is different from my example, of course.

[Marco van Herwaarden]

Originally Posted by EnIgMa1234

IMO if the TOS were rewritten, you will see a lot less hacks being posted which is a lot worst on the entire community.

This is one of the reasons why we decided not to put such a rule in our TOS. One of the other reasons is that you can never override law in your TOS, general law always takes precedence.

Another reason is that a coder already has the choice to write down the conditions (and that could also be that they wave their rights) on their modifications if they choose so.

About "Open Source" type of modifications. In the most simple form this is already possible, the author only needs to write that he allows others to make changes to his work, only the distribution would be a bit difficult (new version would need to be posted in a reply and original author coutld choose to update the first post with the new version). I have already for some time an item on my ToDo/Wishlist to make it possible to have a real environment for collaborative community projects, but that will be something that might take a very long time as it is not so easy to setup with vBulletin (SVN type of environment with test boards for each project with also support for things stored in the database - templates/plugins).

[MRGTB]

This is one of the reasons why we decided not to put such a rule in our TOS. One of the other reasons is that you can never override law in your TOS, general law always takes precedence.

Thats what I was thinking also, that a change in the TOS would not protect vB.org anyway. It's a bit like when you see P2P sites trying to use a TOS Disclaimer - thinking it will protect them.

It doesn't!!

[Spinball]

Originally Posted by Dean C

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but that's my decision to make, not anyone elses It's also important to remember the benefits of posting modifications here. I released quite a few in my earlier days here, and offered regular support throughout the forums. It served as a gateway for me to get lots of clients. Now, if Joe Bloggs comes along and takes one of my old mods, and releases it with a few fixes, who's to say that he won't get any potential commercial benefit.

At the end of the day you can argue, whine and say what you like about this subject, but peoples work remains copyrighted to them, and no-one else. Nothing you do, vBulletin.org does, can change that

The important fact that you are completely ignoring is that when people start using mods they become dependent upon them. The better the mod, the more dependent. Take one of the most popular mods, for example, (either) arcade. Say the next release of vB broke it and the author couldn't be bothered to update it. How many THOUSANDS of people would then be demanding that their favourite forum administrators get their arcade going again?
The admin of those forums would be left stranded and with vBulletin.org's current policy, nobody could adopt the hack.

[Dean C]

Originally Posted by Spinball

The important fact that you are completely ignoring is that when people start using mods they become dependent upon them. The better the mod, the more dependent. Take one of the most popular mods, for example, (either) arcade. Say the next release of vB broke it and the author couldn't be bothered to update it. How many THOUSANDS of people would then be demanding that their favourite forum administrators get their arcade going again?
The admin of those forums would be left stranded and with vBulletin.org's current policy, nobody could adopt the hack.

Look, your point is mute. It's been stated umpteen times in this thread, by myself and others. Modifications are copyrighted to their owner. Not you, not anyone else is allowed to modify that code and distribute it. Simple as that. Nothing you say or do here will change that, unless they implement a checkbox where modification owners can choose to exempt their modification from that copyright.

It's not my problem if you're dependent on my mod and I abandon it and it's not vBulletin.org's. It's yours. I'm not saying it's right, and I certainly would never abandon my users, and I completely understand where you're coming from.

No matter how much you complain about it, there's only one solution to the problem and that's adding the checkbox. And even then, I personally won't opt in. And I think a lot of hack authors would feel the same way. There's a lot of intellectual property involved in big modifications such as the arcade hack you use in your example, so I doubt John would want anyone taking over his code should he disappear for whatever reason. And you must also remember that some people disappear for reasons out of their control. A member here a few years ago disappeared, and last I heard he was kicked out of his home, and living without a computer in one-bedroom flat in a bad area. These circumstances were out of his control. Once he sorts himself out, I think he'd be pretty annoyed that all the hard work he'd put in was out of his control. This is why copyright is there, to protect people like this

On a completely unrelated note, some of the links on your homepage are broken. I was trying to view your home cinema

[towermatt]

I just read this whole thread because it was bumped.

I can't believe this sense of "entitlement" that some people seem to have.

On the one hand, we have a forum that is staffed by volunteers to help us organize and find answers to our problems. They don't write stuff, they just provide a place for it to gather.

Then we have the coders/designers that spend 100's of man hours of their personal time to create free add ons and hacks for vbulletin.

But wait...that is not enough. The staff of this site not only has to keep things running smoothly, they also have to police the codes that are being put on the site to make sure everyone is cozy as a kitten. And that is without any legal right to the hack.

Too much to ask if you want my opinion (and even if you didn't)

It is our own responsibility, as members, to make sure if we have hacks or addons that we love, we keep in close contact with the developer outside vbulletin.org

Don't relax in the shade provided by this tree and then talk about how it isn't enough. Its selfish.

Also, don't speak like any of this stuff is a right to you.

**gets off soapbox**

[nix]

well said.