Is buying the copyright removal worth it?

[coolguy67]

So there's a way to remove the XF copyright without buying it - has something to do with extra.less

Spoiler

/* Copyright */
.p-footer-copyright{font-size: 0px;}
.custom-copyright{font-size: 11px;}
/* End */

So is it worth buying copyright removal when you can do this?

 

[AndrewSimm]

I believe it could given that copyright litigation is full of grey areas. Whatever decison or costs are arrived at can be open to may factors. Was it coincidenatlly an infringement (can be in misc/art but less likely in this case). Was the owner's income damaged? etc. So if someone claimed they didn't know it was an infrungement your honour, it will unlikely affect a verdict, but I belive that may affect the amount of damages.

On a low level, if someone posts a cartoon on my forum, and there is a clear copyright notice, and they do it repatedly after a warning then they'd get banned. If there was no clear copyright notice I would cut them some slack - even if I find it was copyright.

I agree that website owners, including Xenforo, should post copyright notices at the bottom of their page. I agree that this offers better protection incase of litigation. I don't agree that a copyright is required to be posted any every page of a piece of software and that by doing so it offers more protection. Copyrights during installation and within the files would more than cover that XF is copyrighted. Certainly this is an opinion but if you consider every piece of installable software you use as evidence then I think the evidence supports my argument.

 

[Kilt]

We're getting away from the original topic, but copyright law for software is still ambiguous in the U.S. It depends on what the copyright notices are trying to protect. In the 1980's smart software developers would put copyright notices in each module of the source code and object code to protect the literal code itself. (They would also put in proprietary and trade secret notices.)

However, I suspect the kind of copyright notices we're talking about are not to protect the code, per se, but rather the so-called "sequence, structure and organization" or "look and feel" of the GUI, which is where much of the legal ambiguity still obtains. Variations of this issue have been litigated for 35+ years in the U.S., most prominently in Apple's famous suit against Microsoft's Windows.

Suppose Eve had access only to a version of Program X that has no copyright notice in the GUI. She decides to copy that GUI exactly for a competitive product, but using completely different code. The developers of Program X sue Eve for infringement. She raises what's called the innocent infringer defense -- i.e., "I had no idea it was copyright protected." This defense may be fairly weak in any event (and only affects the amount of statutory damages), but it would be completely nullified if Eve's copy of the Program X had had a copyright notice in the GUI in the first place.

Thinking this through further, it occurs to me that if Eve has to go through documented and provable legal transactions to "buy out" of a copyright notice in the GUI, her ability to claim ignorance of the copyright status would probably be de minimus.

 

[Mr Lucky]

However, Branding Removal does not allow you to white-label XenForo or suggest in some way that software other than XenForo is responsible for the pages being generated by or through XenForo.

This seems to be a bit of a grey area though. I look at this and think it's a combination of xenforo and other forum software?

• The Fora platform includes forum software by XenForo

Speak EV - Electric Car Forums

A community for enthusiasts of all makes and models of EV from BMW to Tesla, Renault, Nissan, Mitsubishi and more. Join the electrifying discussion today!

www.speakev.com

EDIT: on second thoughts that is probably a misinterpretation and is possibly more to do with point 4, attribution.

 

[Wanji]

Not worth it.

Hello @Kier @Chris D

I'm surprised my answer on this esteemed forum got the attention and was given a score. I got a score of -2 for my answer. I am curious what are the scoring criteria set out here?

The OP asked, "Is buying the copyright removal worth it?" and I answered honestly based on my criteria. Is it wrong?

When I was in school I never got a minus score, at least zero, even for the wrong answer.

Now I realize we live in a different world. Assessment is not only objective but also very subjective.

 

[Nicolas FR]

It’s simply a way to signal a disagreement to your point. Nothing serious.

 

[Wanji]

Yes I know, and I will not go to the principal.

 

[Chris D]

I'm surprised my answer on this esteemed forum got the attention and was given a score. I got a score of -2 for my answer. I am curious what are the scoring criteria set out here?

Ideally people would upvote correct answers and downvote incorrect answers. On that basis, I don't think it's fair for you to have been given two downvotes because whether it's worth it or not is subjective and it is both worth it and not worth it depending on an infinite number of factors for each individual that considers it.

But, it is what it is. Some people disagreed with you and decided to downvote you. I don't think it needs to be analyzed quite so deeply.

 

[MySiteGuy]

Hello @Kier @Chris D

I'm surprised my answer on this esteemed forum got the attention and was given a score. I got a score of -2 for my answer. I am curious what are the scoring criteria set out here?

The OP asked, "Is buying the copyright removal worth it?" and I answered honestly based on my criteria. Is it wrong?

When I was in school I never got a minus score, at least zero, even for the wrong answer.

Now I realize we live in a different world. Assessment is not only objective but also very subjective.

I think your "not worth it" answer was useless, and offered nothing of value to the discussion. Perhaps it was laziness, or a case negativity, but whatever the reason, you offered nothing to support "not worth it."

 

[Mr Lucky]

t’s simply a way to signal a disagreement to your point. Nothing serious.

I don't think it's fair for you to have been given two downvotes because whether it's worth it or not is subjective and it is both worth it and not worth it depending on an infinite number of factors for each individual that considers it.

This is one of the problems with the question voting system. It doesn't work for this type of question where there is no "solution." See my thread here.

But this is now off topic, and would maybe work better in the thread I've linked to.

 

[Paul B]

This is one of the problems with the question voting system. It doesn't work for this type of question where there is no "solution."

 

[Wanji]

I think your "not worth it" answer was useless, and offered nothing of value to the discussion. Perhaps it was laziness, or a case negativity, but whatever the reason, you offered nothing to support "not worth it."

Apparently you are an educated person. Just based on three words you can judge me perfectly that:

• my answer is useless
• my answer is not worth for the discussion
• I answered lazily, or
• I have spread negativity.

English is not my mother tongue. If you don't know, now you know!

"Not worth it", no more no less. I can't elaborate further even though I wanted to. I'm afraid that the more I explain my answer, it will distort the meaning of my answer because of grammatical errors, for example.

The most perfect interpretation that best fits my "not worth it" answer is the answer given by @Forsaken .

Honestly... These threads basically encourage short answers.

Is branding free worth it? Not really. Why? Because it adds nothing of value, and is more expensive than other investments such as quality add-ons, custom development or branding free for add-ons. $250-300 is more than many communities make in a month, so it is not really worth spending a month income on something that is essentially pointless unless you can afford it.

The only time it is worth it is a) you can afford it, b) you have a brand that you would rather not dilute with other copyrights. Even the second one is not very valuable, unless you have a particular reason for it.

I generally buy branding free for add-ons for sites I own or run, and if the income is enough to justify it I will pay for branding free for XF or other software. But it's really not worth it .

 

[Chris D]

Okay, I think we've drifted far enough off-course now to warrant bringing this to a close. As a reminder, the below should answer any relevant questions pertaining to branding removal. If anyone has any further questions, please feel free to open a ticket or Contact us.

Jokes aside, there seems to have been some confusion over what is permitted with Branding Removal, so here it is in plain English.

1. All XenForo-generated pages include copyright and attribution text at the bottom of the page, which reads Forum software (or) Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-20(year) XenForo Ltd. and links back to xenforo.com. We call this the copyright notice.
   
   
2. Without Branding Removal, you must retain, display and not modify in any way the copyright notice at the bottom of all public facing pages.
   
   
3. Branding Removal grants you the right to remove or hide the copyright notice from the bottom of public facing pages.
   
   
4. If you want to remove the copyright notice for some reason but retain some attribution to XenForo, that's great.
   
   
5. However, Branding Removal does not allow you to white-label XenForo or suggest in some way that software other than XenForo is responsible for the pages being generated by or through XenForo.

 

[Wanji]

Not worth it.