An issue with licensing that requires administrative attention...
-
(pls note... this was published on the c# forum by mistake, and i'll be removing it from there straight after this post) Hi there, I'm posting here with something that I believe is an issue that requires an administrators feedback to get resolved. See the problem is that it's a licensing issue about someone deciding to smack a license on their product after publishing here. here's a link to the forum... http://www.codeproject.com/cs/miscctrl/sortedlistview.asp?select=588727&df=100&forumid=3615&msg=588727#xx588645xx I'm not writing here for validation. What I would really like is for someone to have a read, and let us all know whether someone can just retrospectively add a license in the way that this individual has attempted to do. I homestly think I'm right, that it can't be done... but it's not the first time i've been incorrect with legal stuff, so I'll give in if the administrators of this site believe that he can retro-fit a license and that I'm wrong. The one thing I'm sure of is that I'm convinced that what I'm saying is correct, and Carlos is convinced that what he's saying is correct. I think we need a little arbitration Thanks very much for any input regarding this issue. Maybe it should become a FAQ so that people are aware of what is correct and incorrect in disputes such as this? Thanks, Rolfy.
Well, I tend to think that it would be to the demise of CodeProject for this to be able to be done, because then no one would be able to use CP code for fear that its owner might change the license when they already are using it. At the very least, they should not be allowed to impose the new license on projects that had already used the code before they changed the license. If they want to sell an app/lib with that code in it after they've already posted it to CodeProject, let them do it! But they must not impose the license on those who are already using their code in their apps, because it had a different license.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi -
(pls note... this was published on the c# forum by mistake, and i'll be removing it from there straight after this post) Hi there, I'm posting here with something that I believe is an issue that requires an administrators feedback to get resolved. See the problem is that it's a licensing issue about someone deciding to smack a license on their product after publishing here. here's a link to the forum... http://www.codeproject.com/cs/miscctrl/sortedlistview.asp?select=588727&df=100&forumid=3615&msg=588727#xx588645xx I'm not writing here for validation. What I would really like is for someone to have a read, and let us all know whether someone can just retrospectively add a license in the way that this individual has attempted to do. I homestly think I'm right, that it can't be done... but it's not the first time i've been incorrect with legal stuff, so I'll give in if the administrators of this site believe that he can retro-fit a license and that I'm wrong. The one thing I'm sure of is that I'm convinced that what I'm saying is correct, and Carlos is convinced that what he's saying is correct. I think we need a little arbitration Thanks very much for any input regarding this issue. Maybe it should become a FAQ so that people are aware of what is correct and incorrect in disputes such as this? Thanks, Rolfy.
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Do you want articles about controls from our FLUID GUI Library?
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma GandhiI was hoping that was always part of the plan! ;) cheers, Chris Maunder
-
I was hoping that was always part of the plan! ;) cheers, Chris Maunder
It was! BTW, in case you didn't know, we, too, are moving off CodeProject, because we need more than it can provide. But I will be more than happy to write articles for the controls, to put on CodeProject. And they will be high-quality articles and controls.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi -
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
Yes but can we vote him out of the community and/or off the planet. Have no problems with him starting a commercial venture. But trying to pull existing articles and code just seems churlish to me. Like he hasn't cribbed idea's and snippets of code from everyone else here. Not impressed Carlos :mad: X|
-
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris, Have you considered simply rating articles on their license? Perhaps even include this in the Submission Wizard, for authors to supply: - no restrictions whatsoever - some restrictions, but ok to use in commercial apps - cannot use in commercial apps This way, there won't be any future claim that "there never was any license". HPS HwndSpy - GUI developer's aid to visually locate and inspect windows. For the month of August only, use coupon code CP-81239 for 30% off.
-
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Yes but can we vote him out of the community and/or off the planet. Have no problems with him starting a commercial venture. But trying to pull existing articles and code just seems churlish to me. Like he hasn't cribbed idea's and snippets of code from everyone else here. Not impressed Carlos :mad: X|
Joey Bloggs wrote: trying to pull existing articles and code just seems churlish to me Yes, but it's been done on CP before, without much notice. HPS HwndSpy - GUI developer's aid to visually locate and inspect windows. For the month of August only, use coupon code CP-81239 for 30% off.
-
(pls note... this was published on the c# forum by mistake, and i'll be removing it from there straight after this post) Hi there, I'm posting here with something that I believe is an issue that requires an administrators feedback to get resolved. See the problem is that it's a licensing issue about someone deciding to smack a license on their product after publishing here. here's a link to the forum... http://www.codeproject.com/cs/miscctrl/sortedlistview.asp?select=588727&df=100&forumid=3615&msg=588727#xx588645xx I'm not writing here for validation. What I would really like is for someone to have a read, and let us all know whether someone can just retrospectively add a license in the way that this individual has attempted to do. I homestly think I'm right, that it can't be done... but it's not the first time i've been incorrect with legal stuff, so I'll give in if the administrators of this site believe that he can retro-fit a license and that I'm wrong. The one thing I'm sure of is that I'm convinced that what I'm saying is correct, and Carlos is convinced that what he's saying is correct. I think we need a little arbitration Thanks very much for any input regarding this issue. Maybe it should become a FAQ so that people are aware of what is correct and incorrect in disputes such as this? Thanks, Rolfy.
Not even Microsoft can do that ! There was no initial contract specifying that retroactive changes would happen, therefore it is invalid. Elaine :rose: The tigress is here :-D
-
Chris, Have you considered simply rating articles on their license? Perhaps even include this in the Submission Wizard, for authors to supply: - no restrictions whatsoever - some restrictions, but ok to use in commercial apps - cannot use in commercial apps This way, there won't be any future claim that "there never was any license". HPS HwndSpy - GUI developer's aid to visually locate and inspect windows. For the month of August only, use coupon code CP-81239 for 30% off.
I think that the current situation where all code submitted is immediately placed into the public domain is the correct one. We really do not need to bogged down in PD, GPL, LGPL etc etc You could also argue PD for the article. If they are not prepared to place the code and its documentation into the public domain then don't publish it on Code Project, its really very simple. They can pay a publishing house to print it up for them. It is called "vanity publishing". Downside is the possiblity that we miss out on a few articles and projects, which is infinitely better than the alternative.
-
Carlos' articles are an issue that I am currently dealing with. The long and the short of it is that Carlos has provided the community with some great code but, like CodeJock and BCG Software before him, he has decided to turn his classes into a commercial venture. We wish him all the best, and it's great to see a CodeProject member make his hobby his job, but it does also mean that all his articles (including the one you pointed out) will be removed at his request. Carlos retains the right to do what he wishes with his articles. His code is in the public domain so he cannot ask you to stop using code that was downloaded previous to his desire to change his licencing terms, but he can ask us to stop redistributing it - which we will honour. This is sad because Carlos' articles filled a hole (albeit it a small one) we had. The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. We are planning (in fact I'm hoping to have something Monday) to put the whole question of Terms for authors and readers onto a much firmer footing so that everyone knows exactly where they stand. Balancing free use with copyright and ownership has proved to be a nice little windfall for our lawyer ;) My suggestion: Let's have a competition. We list all articles that we think need to be written (including any that Carlos wishes to no longer make available) and we simply rewrite them. There are half a million of us - I can't see that it will be that hard to do! cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris Maunder wrote: The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. That issue should never happen if Code Project was simply enforcing that any article contributed makes clear as to under what license it's distributed. For example at Source Forge you have to choose from available approved Open Source licenses or wait for approval if your license differs. Code Project is not making that part clear and it can only get worse with time. There are some GPL articles here and many people believes that if it's published on CP then GPL no longer applies. Its a ticking time bomb that might cause a serious problems in the future. The whole issue can be resolved instantly by enforcing contributors to choose from approved by CP licenses or to declare their own license that will be reviewed and either approved or rejected. As a side effect the license enforcement would probably reduce the flow of crappy artciles we are observing lately if articles were reviewed before allowing them to show up as CP articles.
/* I C++, therefore I am... */
-
I think that the current situation where all code submitted is immediately placed into the public domain is the correct one. We really do not need to bogged down in PD, GPL, LGPL etc etc You could also argue PD for the article. If they are not prepared to place the code and its documentation into the public domain then don't publish it on Code Project, its really very simple. They can pay a publishing house to print it up for them. It is called "vanity publishing". Downside is the possiblity that we miss out on a few articles and projects, which is infinitely better than the alternative.
Joey Bloggs wrote: the current situation where all code submitted is immediately placed into the public domain Yes, that would be nice, but unfortunately it is not the current situation. There are now articles on CP that range all the way from PD to GPL to non-commercial use only. Sometimes this is stated in the article, sometimes you have to download and inspect the module headers to determine the status. It's now a mess, and an explicit declaration would help people figure out if they can use the article code in their app. HPS HwndSpy - GUI developer's aid to visually locate and inspect windows. For the month of August only, use coupon code CP-81239 for 30% off.
-
Chris Maunder wrote: The whole issue of Terms of Use is something we have been grappling with for (believe it or not) 18 months. That issue should never happen if Code Project was simply enforcing that any article contributed makes clear as to under what license it's distributed. For example at Source Forge you have to choose from available approved Open Source licenses or wait for approval if your license differs. Code Project is not making that part clear and it can only get worse with time. There are some GPL articles here and many people believes that if it's published on CP then GPL no longer applies. Its a ticking time bomb that might cause a serious problems in the future. The whole issue can be resolved instantly by enforcing contributors to choose from approved by CP licenses or to declare their own license that will be reviewed and either approved or rejected. As a side effect the license enforcement would probably reduce the flow of crappy artciles we are observing lately if articles were reviewed before allowing them to show up as CP articles.
/* I C++, therefore I am... */
Thank you. HPS HwndSpy - GUI developer's aid to visually locate and inspect windows. For the month of August only, use coupon code CP-81239 for 30% off.
-
Joey Bloggs wrote: the current situation where all code submitted is immediately placed into the public domain Yes, that would be nice, but unfortunately it is not the current situation. There are now articles on CP that range all the way from PD to GPL to non-commercial use only. Sometimes this is stated in the article, sometimes you have to download and inspect the module headers to determine the status. It's now a mess, and an explicit declaration would help people figure out if they can use the article code in their app. HPS HwndSpy - GUI developer's aid to visually locate and inspect windows. For the month of August only, use coupon code CP-81239 for 30% off.
Ok I see where you are coming from now. I still think that the fix is for code project submission rules to be that all code submitted goes immediately into the PD. No discussion / no exceptions. Rather than a mess of different licences. CodeProject is primarily about small works not large frameworks or complete projects / applications.