Custom BB Code Manager Discussion

[Cheesegrits]

Cedric,

I think once you calm down, you will realize that KK is not being unreasonable. You cannot simply take someone else's work, and put it out under a different copyright. You just can't. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with someone wanting to license their work, and not allow open source releases.

It's nothing to do with ego or "ultimate control", it's about establishing intellectual property right, which is any author's absolute right. And when the owner tells you they wish to assert their property right, the only appropriate response is "OK".

You can no more do this with an addon than you could with XF itself. You can't just take the XF code, alter it, and put it out with an open source license. And I assume you'd never even consider it. So I find it hard to understand why you can't respect KK's wishes on this.

-- hugh

 

[cclaerhout]

I'm very calm. As I said the code has already been rewritten, so again, that's no more a license problem. You want another addon, you're going to have one, even if this move is stupid.

Now for your information the Bbcm which is currently in the Resource Manger has my code in it, the button manager and many fixes. The button manager is coming from the MarkItUp Editor which had a copyright before that I've changed to make it under the CC license By to give it to King Kovifor.

Now I disagree you with you, the problem is indeed an ego problem. And unfortunately, there's nothing to fix this.

 

[Jeremy]

I'm very calm. As I said the code has already been rewritten, so again, that's no more a license problem. You want another addon, you're going to have one, even if this move is stupid.

Now for your information the Bbcm which is currently in the Resource Manger has my code in it, the button manager and many fixes. The button manager is coming from the MarkItUp Editor which had a copyright before that I've changed to make it under the CC license By to give it to King Kovifor.

Now I disagree you with you, the problem is indeed an ego problem. And unfortunately, there's nothing to fix this.

You chose to put them into BBCM under my license. It is not an ego issue. Never has been, never will be. I created BBCM and released it under my copyright license. Nobody but I can chose to change that.

 

[Forsaken]

I'm very calm. As I said the code has already been rewritten, so again, that's no more a license problem. You want another addon, you're going to have one, even if this move is stupid.

Now for your information the Bbcm which is currently in the Resource Manger has my code in it, the button manager and many fixes. The button manager is coming from the MarkItUp Editor which had a copyright before that I've changed to make it under the CC license By to give it to King Kovifor.

Now I disagree you with you, the problem is indeed an ego problem. And unfortunately, there's nothing to fix this.

The only ego problem was you strong arming Stewart because you had had hurt feelings and acting as if you own rights to an add-on which you do not.

Yes, you have submitted patches and fixes and rewritten this code. No you do not own anything because it has always been proprietary and was only allowed because Jeremy didn't expect you to throw a fit over such a small matter.

Do not blame this on Jeremy; this is all due to your actions which caused him to get flooded by PC's, Emails and text messages.

 

[cclaerhout]

You chose to put them into BBCM under my license. It is not an ego issue. Never has been, never will be. I created BBCM and released it under my copyright license. Nobody but I can chose to change that.

No, my code in the current version in the RM is still under the CC by license which is compatible with your license. That's not exactly the same.

 

[Forsaken]

No, my code in the current version in the RM is still under the CC by license which is compatible with your license. That's not exactly the same.

Yes, your changes are licensed under CC.

The add-on itself is licensed as proprietary by Jeremy, who owns the rights tot he add-on.

You have no rights to re-distribute without his permission, which he will not give.

 

[cclaerhout]

No you do not own anything because it has always been proprietary

I'm very sorry, but I own my code. Like it or not. Now since you two both are working together and love to play the 'like' games to support each others, I can't match the number.
And anyway everything has been said.

 

[Jeremy]

I'm very sorry, but I own my code. Like it or not. Now since you two both are working together and love to play the 'like' games to support each others, I can't match the number.
And anyway everything has been said.

The like game isn't being played here. I agree with what he posted, because it is the truth. You chose to add your code into my proprietary license, meaning it falls under the proprietary license I originally released BBCM under. No CC license is technically compatible with my license, since CC allows redistribution without prior permission, which I do not.

 

[cclaerhout]

The like game isn't being played here. I agree with what he posted, because it is the truth. You chose to add your code into my proprietary license, meaning it falls under the proprietary license I originally released BBCM under. No CC license is technically compatible with my license, since CC allows redistribution without prior permission, which I do not.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/=> you can use as much CC by license code as you want in your addon. So it's totally compatible.

 

[Forsaken]

I'm very sorry, but I own my code. Like it or not. Now since you two both are working together and love to play the 'like' games to support each others, I can't match the number.
And anyway everything has been said.

Yes, you own your code.

You do not own the add-on, nor can you re-distribute the add-on even if it includes your code as it was released under a proprietary license. You were never given permission to change the license of the add-on nor were you given any rights to the add-on other than to what you submitted.

As far as Jeremy liking my posts... That's because I'm right and he agrees what I said. It isn't like he's liking everything I say just because it is said against you. Not like likes matter anyways, but sure, use that as an excuse for your attitude.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/=> you can use as much CC by license code as you want in your addon. So it's totally compatible.

It is not compatible as the original license is directly contrary to the CC license. The only thing licensed under CC is your code, which you submitted willingly. You're also attributed with the work you did.

 

[Paul B]

It's not your add-on though cclaerhout so your argument is null and void.

The author of the add-on has made his position clear so please respect that.

 

[Arkshine]

I may be wrong, but from what I understand, Cédric wanted simply to share updates, something King Kovifor could not do, and it happens he used CC License By because he would be the right thing to do at this moment, which has made many happy users. I'm not sure if he was that wrong to post his first updates as CC, before code was rewritten, but whatever King Kovifor behaviuor is legit or not, the fact is no harm has been done and from that, it would have been just the right way to consider the addon above all (stubornness?), working together, providing a quality add-on. For that, I just don't understand why people reacts weirdely this way against Cédric.
I'm just happy as user, he has continued to developp an improved version, and for his work/time/support, he has my thanks.

EDIT: sorry Brogan, did not see your post when I was written mine.

 

[Jeremy]

I may be wrong, but from what I understand, Cédric wanted simply to share updates, something King Kovifor could not do, and it happens he used CC License By because he would be the right thing to do at this moment, which has made many happy users. I'm not sure if he was that wrong to post his first updates as CC, before code was rewritten, but whatever King Kovifor behaviuor is legit or not, the fact is no harm has been done and from that, it would have been just the right way to consider the addon above all (stubornness?), working together, providing a quality add-on. For that, I just don't understand why people reacts weirdely this way against Cédric.
I'm just happy as user, he has continued to developp an improved version, and for his work/time/support, he has my thanks.

EDIT: sorry Brogan, did not see your post when I was written mine.

According to licensing and copyright law, nobody but the original creator (or the heirs in the event of passing or authorized parties) may modify the license or copyright status of the code and/or piece of copyrighted work.

 

[Forsaken]

I may be wrong, but from what I understand, Cédric wanted simply to share updates, something King Kovifor could not do, and it happens he used CC License By because he would be the right thing to do at this moment, which has made many happy users. I'm not sure if he was that wrong to post his first updates as CC, before code was rewritten, but whatever King Kovifor behaviuor is legit or not, the fact is no harm has been done and from that, it would have been just the right way to consider the addon above all (stubornness?), working together, providing a quality add-on. For that, I just don't understand why people reacts weirdely this way against Cédric.
I'm just happy as user, he has continued to developp an improved version, and for his work/time/support, he has my thanks.

EDIT: sorry Brogan, did not see your post when I was written mine.

Cedric was acting as if he owned the add-on at one point due to his submissions and forced someone to remove it from their site because he wasn't attributed as one of the coders of the add-ons (He only needs to be attributed in the release).

 

[Arkshine]

Well, yes, from a strict point of view. But here we're talking about someone who has tried to help users and you, to improve your useful and original add-on, where you're using also some of his codes and no harm has been done. Sorry, but there is something wrong there. I understand, it's legit, but definitevely wrong in this situation, when both could just work together and benefit the community. As user, I don't understand your stuborness.
Anyway, I don't want to argue, and will stop there, It was just how a random user telling how he was feeling about this. No matter the reason, such reactions are wrong.

 

[cclaerhout]

It's not your add-on though cclaerhout so your argument is null and void.

The author of the add-on has made his position clear so please respect that.

The current version of Bbcm of the RM is not my addon, but the new one is, especially the templates integration. And I have the right to extend the bbcode class and to allow users to configure Bb Codes.

Now, Brogan it's a thing that you helped Jeremy to make some Bb Codes and told me the Button manager was bad (during your "break"), but you're back as a moderator now. So I'm asking you as a moderator, is it forbidden to extend the BbCode formatter and to allow users to create customize Bb Codes because an addon already does this?

 

[Paul B]

If it is your code and your add-on then release it as a separate add-on.

If you have based it on the original add-on, reusing any of the code, you may not do so without the original author's approval.

That is the final word on the matter.

This thread is already a train wreck so bear the above in mind before you decide to continue arguing the point.

 

[cclaerhout]

If it is your code and your add-on then release it as a separate add-on.

Perfect, thanks.

 

[Jeremy]

The current version of Bbcm of the RM is not my addon, but the new one is, especially the templates integration. And I have the right to extend the bbcode class and to allow users to configure Bb Codes.

Now, Brogan it's a thing that you helped Jeremy to make some Bb Codes and told me the Button manager was bad (during your "break"), but you're back as a moderator now. So I'm asking you as a moderator, is it forbidden to extend the BbCode formatter and to allow users to create customize Bb Codes because an addon already does this?

I've stated earlier that ideas cannot be copyrighted. They can be claimed as intellectual property in certain cases, not this, and patented. In that case, it's different.

Code is what falls under copyright laws in most of the world.

 

[Jeremy]

Well, yes, from a strict point of view. But here we're talking about someone who has tried to help users and you, to improve your useful and original add-on, where you're using also some of his codes and no harm has been done. Sorry, but there is something wrong there. I understand, it's legit, but definitevely wrong in this situation, when both could just work together and benefit the community. As user, I don't understand your stuborness.
Anyway, I don't want to argue, and will stop there, It was just how a random user telling how he was feeling about this. No matter the reason, such reactions are wrong.

I don't expect a response, but I would like to at least give you one. Developing software is something I do on a daily basis. I deal with NDAs, licenses, and intellectual property on a daily basis. This is an ethical debate, since actions have been made to effectively change the original BBCM software and release it under a different license. Regardless of what users feel, which my seem wrong, is irrelevant to how BBCM is licensed. Even after Cedric began posting updates without my prior approval and going through me first, I allowed it for the users. I just stopped posting them as "official" updates.

My feelings and assertiveness in enforcing my license is not, nor will it ever, be wrong. Legally, that is my right.