Stressin' over the rules!
-
I am an obsessively honest person who is trying to launch a software product primarily of my own construction (like five years worth - I'm new to programming and have other jobs etc.). The Code Project has been a fantastic resource, helping me to learn a great deal about programming (my training is in analytical cytometry instrumentation), and often providing key programming clues to help me resolve the problems I encounter. As I developed my program, I tried very hard NOT to include download/cut/paste code or classes, because I hoped to sell it one day (that day is today) and did not want to end up in the position I am in right now. Now I am in the final stages prior to launch, and due to my honesty obsession, I reviewed my code to make sure that I did not have exact code snippets or classes from this site. Much to my horror, I discovered that there was one class (ItemDataCombo, by Chris Losinger) that HAD somehow made it into my code relatively intact. Because I type everything in, it is not identical to the original, but still, it is basically the same class although I modified it by adding a new member needed for my program (oooh - big deal eh?). While other parts of my program have segments of code adapted from other articles such as Chris Maunder's "Implementing an autocompleting Combobox," in all other cases the snippets I used ended up heavily modified, and/or represent a very small proportion of the code presented in the article. I have tried to contact Mr. Losinger to seek his acceptance of my use of this class inthe commercial setting, so far without success. The class itself does not contain copyright information other than "Copyright 2000" on the About dialog. Mr. Losinger's profile does not discuss his preferences, and I could not find anything in any of his articles discussing his preference with regard to use of his code in the commercial setting. Furthermore, the article "Literal string encryption as part of the build process appears designed for commercial use in that it will hold off crackers. I wonder if at least some other programmers visiting The Code Project would use the class en bloc without aksing (even incorporating it into a commerical program at the corporation at which they work), without attempts to credit the source and without remorse. Some of the programmers I have worked with in the past appeared to use this method almost exclusively, and this is the foundation of at least part of my concern as I looked down upon this practice at the time when
-
I am an obsessively honest person who is trying to launch a software product primarily of my own construction (like five years worth - I'm new to programming and have other jobs etc.). The Code Project has been a fantastic resource, helping me to learn a great deal about programming (my training is in analytical cytometry instrumentation), and often providing key programming clues to help me resolve the problems I encounter. As I developed my program, I tried very hard NOT to include download/cut/paste code or classes, because I hoped to sell it one day (that day is today) and did not want to end up in the position I am in right now. Now I am in the final stages prior to launch, and due to my honesty obsession, I reviewed my code to make sure that I did not have exact code snippets or classes from this site. Much to my horror, I discovered that there was one class (ItemDataCombo, by Chris Losinger) that HAD somehow made it into my code relatively intact. Because I type everything in, it is not identical to the original, but still, it is basically the same class although I modified it by adding a new member needed for my program (oooh - big deal eh?). While other parts of my program have segments of code adapted from other articles such as Chris Maunder's "Implementing an autocompleting Combobox," in all other cases the snippets I used ended up heavily modified, and/or represent a very small proportion of the code presented in the article. I have tried to contact Mr. Losinger to seek his acceptance of my use of this class inthe commercial setting, so far without success. The class itself does not contain copyright information other than "Copyright 2000" on the About dialog. Mr. Losinger's profile does not discuss his preferences, and I could not find anything in any of his articles discussing his preference with regard to use of his code in the commercial setting. Furthermore, the article "Literal string encryption as part of the build process appears designed for commercial use in that it will hold off crackers. I wonder if at least some other programmers visiting The Code Project would use the class en bloc without aksing (even incorporating it into a commerical program at the corporation at which they work), without attempts to credit the source and without remorse. Some of the programmers I have worked with in the past appeared to use this method almost exclusively, and this is the foundation of at least part of my concern as I looked down upon this practice at the time when
In general, you're worrying too much. Integrity is better than the option, though. Technically, the copyright protects the code itself, the way it's written. Copyrights are meant for pictures and things like that and are hard to enforce on code. Technically, you could change all the variable names, character spacing, move some stuff in two lines into one and vice versa, and you'd probably be fine from a legal perspective. The author's copyright notice doesn't have much bearing on this, nor does the word "Copyright" -- you own the copyright on your work whether or not you write that or register it with the USPTO. On the other hand, if you're using his code, you should give him credit. You've tried asking, which is good. You've tried to figure out other options, which is more than most would do. Attributing internal code to him in an About box he'll never see won't get anyone much. If you really want to take the high ground, send him money. He's probably got a Paypal account. The best thing to do is to rip out that code, figure out how and why it works, then re-write it yourself. It's legal, appropriate, honest, and it'll also teach you more than copying someone else's homework. Send him money anyway, but because he taught you how to do something that you're going to profit off, not because you copied his code. HTH! Stephan
-
I am an obsessively honest person who is trying to launch a software product primarily of my own construction (like five years worth - I'm new to programming and have other jobs etc.). The Code Project has been a fantastic resource, helping me to learn a great deal about programming (my training is in analytical cytometry instrumentation), and often providing key programming clues to help me resolve the problems I encounter. As I developed my program, I tried very hard NOT to include download/cut/paste code or classes, because I hoped to sell it one day (that day is today) and did not want to end up in the position I am in right now. Now I am in the final stages prior to launch, and due to my honesty obsession, I reviewed my code to make sure that I did not have exact code snippets or classes from this site. Much to my horror, I discovered that there was one class (ItemDataCombo, by Chris Losinger) that HAD somehow made it into my code relatively intact. Because I type everything in, it is not identical to the original, but still, it is basically the same class although I modified it by adding a new member needed for my program (oooh - big deal eh?). While other parts of my program have segments of code adapted from other articles such as Chris Maunder's "Implementing an autocompleting Combobox," in all other cases the snippets I used ended up heavily modified, and/or represent a very small proportion of the code presented in the article. I have tried to contact Mr. Losinger to seek his acceptance of my use of this class inthe commercial setting, so far without success. The class itself does not contain copyright information other than "Copyright 2000" on the About dialog. Mr. Losinger's profile does not discuss his preferences, and I could not find anything in any of his articles discussing his preference with regard to use of his code in the commercial setting. Furthermore, the article "Literal string encryption as part of the build process appears designed for commercial use in that it will hold off crackers. I wonder if at least some other programmers visiting The Code Project would use the class en bloc without aksing (even incorporating it into a commerical program at the corporation at which they work), without attempts to credit the source and without remorse. Some of the programmers I have worked with in the past appeared to use this method almost exclusively, and this is the foundation of at least part of my concern as I looked down upon this practice at the time when
I would not do squat without something in writing from Chris. In the absence of that rewrite it on your own, send Chris a copy of your rewrite with a declaration of your intent. I would not send money at this point. He's not responding to you so either your efforts have been very minimal, a spam filter is catching it, he's registered with a dead address or something else. This isn't really rules though. This is ethics. This is called making money off the work of others without their express permission (which I know you are seeking). If you plow on without Chris' permission you have one major problelm. Years down the road when you are rich and he is poor (given the way the U.S. Legal System Works) he can probably come after you and own everything about you with a simple letter from the Quicken Lawyer software product. I'd do what you can to reach Chris or park the code and write your own. The fact you have customers waiting is strictly a public affairs issue for you (I've been there.) and you get to deal with that in whatever ethical way you can manage.
"You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)
-
In general, you're worrying too much. Integrity is better than the option, though. Technically, the copyright protects the code itself, the way it's written. Copyrights are meant for pictures and things like that and are hard to enforce on code. Technically, you could change all the variable names, character spacing, move some stuff in two lines into one and vice versa, and you'd probably be fine from a legal perspective. The author's copyright notice doesn't have much bearing on this, nor does the word "Copyright" -- you own the copyright on your work whether or not you write that or register it with the USPTO. On the other hand, if you're using his code, you should give him credit. You've tried asking, which is good. You've tried to figure out other options, which is more than most would do. Attributing internal code to him in an About box he'll never see won't get anyone much. If you really want to take the high ground, send him money. He's probably got a Paypal account. The best thing to do is to rip out that code, figure out how and why it works, then re-write it yourself. It's legal, appropriate, honest, and it'll also teach you more than copying someone else's homework. Send him money anyway, but because he taught you how to do something that you're going to profit off, not because you copied his code. HTH! Stephan
Thanks Stephan, You are probably right that I worry too much in general. I was carefully trained as a kid to be self-destructive, and I am trying not to be so good at it. Sending money! Now there is an option! I suppose there are several ways to do it - a percentage of the total asking price based on the number of lines of code might be one option - or a one time honorarium for teaching me a key basic of programming. The high road has always been the place for me, and since I first added the class (and other code) in question many moons ago, I have learned a great deal; from The Code Project and elsewhere. In reality it will not be too hard to rip it out and redo it - and how much fun can you have on a software project if you do not have some kind of last minute glitch requiring numerous "crunch mode" hours constantly interrupted by the impatient calls of anxious users anyway? Thanks for responding. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." Richard Feynman, Minority Report to the Official Report on the Space Shuttle Challenger Crash
-
I would not do squat without something in writing from Chris. In the absence of that rewrite it on your own, send Chris a copy of your rewrite with a declaration of your intent. I would not send money at this point. He's not responding to you so either your efforts have been very minimal, a spam filter is catching it, he's registered with a dead address or something else. This isn't really rules though. This is ethics. This is called making money off the work of others without their express permission (which I know you are seeking). If you plow on without Chris' permission you have one major problelm. Years down the road when you are rich and he is poor (given the way the U.S. Legal System Works) he can probably come after you and own everything about you with a simple letter from the Quicken Lawyer software product. I'd do what you can to reach Chris or park the code and write your own. The fact you have customers waiting is strictly a public affairs issue for you (I've been there.) and you get to deal with that in whatever ethical way you can manage.
"You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)
Thanks code-frog. Yeah, I admit I was hoping you guys would say that sharing code was the whole idea and that everything would be just hunky-dory if I slapped on a little copyright notice and ran it out the door. However, I aleady knew that I could not do that unless I was misinterpreting the rules - and I already knew I could not do it ethically UNLESS my interpretation of the rules was incorrect. Like the message posted here, my efforts at contact have been been detailed and wordy. However, I only discovered this issue yesterday morning. This is my third attempt to get some kind of clarification, and the first that has yielded any response. After I kicked my Jesus habit and stopped going to church to get my soul washed up every week I have found it extremely difficult to do anything unethical (go figure). This is why I am here now, juggling responses to my query and planning the new code instead of emailing installer executables. That is why I just HAD to carefully scan my code for anything that came from The Code Project before I could release. I appreciate your response, and thank you for spending the time to post it. If I had spent the time I spent trying to contact Chris and trying to figure out this stuff and sending all these messages - I might be done by now. As for the customers - they can wait a little longer. Thanks again. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." Richard Feynman, Minority Report to the Official Report on the Space Shuttle Challenger Crash
-
Thanks code-frog. Yeah, I admit I was hoping you guys would say that sharing code was the whole idea and that everything would be just hunky-dory if I slapped on a little copyright notice and ran it out the door. However, I aleady knew that I could not do that unless I was misinterpreting the rules - and I already knew I could not do it ethically UNLESS my interpretation of the rules was incorrect. Like the message posted here, my efforts at contact have been been detailed and wordy. However, I only discovered this issue yesterday morning. This is my third attempt to get some kind of clarification, and the first that has yielded any response. After I kicked my Jesus habit and stopped going to church to get my soul washed up every week I have found it extremely difficult to do anything unethical (go figure). This is why I am here now, juggling responses to my query and planning the new code instead of emailing installer executables. That is why I just HAD to carefully scan my code for anything that came from The Code Project before I could release. I appreciate your response, and thank you for spending the time to post it. If I had spent the time I spent trying to contact Chris and trying to figure out this stuff and sending all these messages - I might be done by now. As for the customers - they can wait a little longer. Thanks again. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." Richard Feynman, Minority Report to the Official Report on the Space Shuttle Challenger Crash
lctrncs wrote:
After I kicked my Jesus habit and stopped going to church to get my soul washed up every week
Shouldn't kicked that. That was your first mistake. ;) That's funny that Chris won't get back to you he seems pretty active on the message boards. I think given that he won't respond this is how I'd go about it and I consider myself just fine for having done so. 1. Keep copies of emails, etc that document your effort to contact him. 2. Send him one final notice declaring A. You intend to use his work and you will preserve credit to him in the code/comments/etc... B. Explain you will be doing it commercially. C. Explain that because he has not responded you are unclear what to do next but that you are going to move forward from here. Then the onus is on him to get in touch with you. I think (as long as you can document your effort to reach him) you are good to go in this regard. I think at this point you've done it right. - Rex
"You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)
-
lctrncs wrote:
After I kicked my Jesus habit and stopped going to church to get my soul washed up every week
Shouldn't kicked that. That was your first mistake. ;) That's funny that Chris won't get back to you he seems pretty active on the message boards. I think given that he won't respond this is how I'd go about it and I consider myself just fine for having done so. 1. Keep copies of emails, etc that document your effort to contact him. 2. Send him one final notice declaring A. You intend to use his work and you will preserve credit to him in the code/comments/etc... B. Explain you will be doing it commercially. C. Explain that because he has not responded you are unclear what to do next but that you are going to move forward from here. Then the onus is on him to get in touch with you. I think (as long as you can document your effort to reach him) you are good to go in this regard. I think at this point you've done it right. - Rex
"You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)
My actions to this point have focused upon attempting to contact Mr. Losinger with regard to this issue, and learning what his preferences are. I have no intention of using Mr. Losinger's work without his express consent. I will gladly pay for his work - if that is what he wants. If I could license the code it would make it possible for me to get my program to market ~now. I can rewrite it, but that will take time. If I license the code, Chris will get part of the money (if he wants it). If I rewrite, he won't. It really does not matter that much to me. Perhaps The Code Project could create a mechanism to facilitate the kind of access to code/intellectual property I seek. If Mr. Losinger chooses not to respond, that suggests that he is unable to respond, is not interested in discussing the issue or does not have the time. I do not have a problem with this - I merely wanted to learn the correct course of action because I have never faced an issue like this before. I would be happy to credit his contribution to my program in what ever way he chooses - including using what it taught me to create something new. Even though it may be a challenge to find another way to do what the class he wrote does - especially if I need to make it significantly different; that is what I will do if I have to. If Mr. Losinger, would like payment I will gladly pay him. It would just be easier if I could find a way to create a win win. The one thing I will not do is use the code without his permission. If I was willing to do that, the application would be for sale now at its new web site, and I would never have tried to contact him in the first place. Thanks for the input. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." Richard Feynman, Minority Report to the Official Report on the Space Shuttle Challenger Crash
-
I am an obsessively honest person who is trying to launch a software product primarily of my own construction (like five years worth - I'm new to programming and have other jobs etc.). The Code Project has been a fantastic resource, helping me to learn a great deal about programming (my training is in analytical cytometry instrumentation), and often providing key programming clues to help me resolve the problems I encounter. As I developed my program, I tried very hard NOT to include download/cut/paste code or classes, because I hoped to sell it one day (that day is today) and did not want to end up in the position I am in right now. Now I am in the final stages prior to launch, and due to my honesty obsession, I reviewed my code to make sure that I did not have exact code snippets or classes from this site. Much to my horror, I discovered that there was one class (ItemDataCombo, by Chris Losinger) that HAD somehow made it into my code relatively intact. Because I type everything in, it is not identical to the original, but still, it is basically the same class although I modified it by adding a new member needed for my program (oooh - big deal eh?). While other parts of my program have segments of code adapted from other articles such as Chris Maunder's "Implementing an autocompleting Combobox," in all other cases the snippets I used ended up heavily modified, and/or represent a very small proportion of the code presented in the article. I have tried to contact Mr. Losinger to seek his acceptance of my use of this class inthe commercial setting, so far without success. The class itself does not contain copyright information other than "Copyright 2000" on the About dialog. Mr. Losinger's profile does not discuss his preferences, and I could not find anything in any of his articles discussing his preference with regard to use of his code in the commercial setting. Furthermore, the article "Literal string encryption as part of the build process appears designed for commercial use in that it will hold off crackers. I wonder if at least some other programmers visiting The Code Project would use the class en bloc without aksing (even incorporating it into a commerical program at the corporation at which they work), without attempts to credit the source and without remorse. Some of the programmers I have worked with in the past appeared to use this method almost exclusively, and this is the foundation of at least part of my concern as I looked down upon this practice at the time when
While I understand your position, I don't share the same concerns you do. If you post code out on the web, you can expect that people will use it. I spent a lot of time working on code that I ultimately posted on Code Project. I also decided to put an Apache-style license on a couple things. But that doesn't mean I have the time or energy to track everyone down with lawsuits if they decide to break that license. I'm happy to see people use my code to get their jobs done, but if someone wants to use my code without giving me credit/money/women there's not much I can do to stop that. It is very likely that someone could come up with a very similar solution without even having seen my stuff.