XF 2.0 | There needs to be better management of copyright notices from addons

[tajhay]

A copyright is our main form of advertisement.

Maybe for admin forums, but i doubt my users could care less about who is 'crafting my addons'. No offence, but i find the AD copyrights far too large, and one of the reasons why i have themes and addons that i have bought off you as disabled. I would have easily bought your monetize addon too, but then i realised the copyright you slap on there (not to mention the level of maturity of the addon as opposed to the one being released by @Siropu).

I understand that devs like some form of advertisement, but unless the websites using your addons is tech/xenforo/admin related, noone is going to care about clicking on the link. I understand everyone has to make some cash, but a more subtle copyright and a more reasonable brand free option will always tempt me to buy and try to the addon a lot more. Devs who release addons without copyright get an instant sale from me if i am in any way interested in the addon, without a second thought.

 

[Ridemonkey]

Maybe for admin forums, but i doubt my users could care less about who is 'crafting my addons'. No offence, but i find the AD copyrights far too large, and one of the reasons why i have themes and addons that i have bought off you as disabled. I would have easily bought your monetize addon too, but then i realised the copyright you slap on there (not to mention the level of maturity of the addon as opposed to the one being released by @Siropu).

Well, first of all, are you 100% sure that there's not one single user on your forum who might run or want to run their own website? Because of course the majority of most users in most forums aren't interested, but a few might be.

Also, I might be crazy, but the only copyright I have in my AD theme is a small copyright line that appears immediately under the other existing copyright lines such as the XenForo one - and it's exactly the same size as the XenForo copyright link. Is there another copyright that they include with addons?

 

[tajhay]

Is there another copyright that they include with addons?

Yes, they have one for addons, one for themes... 'Some XenForo functionality crafted by Audentio Design.'

Well, first of all, are you 100% sure that there's not one single user on your forum who might run or want to run their own website? Because of course the majority of most users in most forums aren't interested, but a few might be.

Fair point and I cant be 100% sure about that, however depending on the niche it is very unlikely. For tech, admin forums that number greatly increases.

 

[Ridemonkey]

Yes, they have one for addons, one for themes... 'Some XenForo functionality crafted by Audentio Design.'

...okay, I guess I don't see that as egregious. It's small, lined up with other copyright notices, and styled to match the theme, just like I don't think XenForo's or Waindigo's notices are bad.

I agree tech forums might drive more traffic but us tech guys have lots of interests

 

[Martok]

Maybe for admin forums, but i doubt my users could care less about who is 'crafting my addons'.

Well, first of all, are you 100% sure that there's not one single user on your forum who might run or want to run their own website?

I was one of these forum user a few years ago looking to run my own forum and I wasn't on a tech/admin forum...

You also have to bear in mind that admins often look at other sites to get ideas for functionality and styling before making purchases. Recently I wanted to update my theme so I looked at various XenForo sites, none of which were admin forums. I saw what I liked based on looks abd functionality abd the way the themes were customised differently on these sites. The copyright in the footers helped me identify the themes I liked, after which I narrowed down to the one I bought. This would have been a lot more difficult with no copyright links.

 

[tajhay]

Recently I wanted to update my theme so I looked at various XenForo sites, none of which were admin forums. I saw what I liked based on looks abd functionality abd the way the themes were customised differently on these sites. The copyright in the footers helped me identify the themes I liked, after which I narrowed down to the one I bought. This would have been a lot more difficult with no copyright links.

Could have just looked at the source code to find the theme in most instances matching the following URL paths.
http://www.xyz.com/styles/stylename/

 

[Martok]

Could have just looked at the source code to find the theme in most instances matching the following URL paths.
http://www.xyz.com/styles/stylename/

That requires more work in both looking at the source code and then working out from that which author made the theme. A copyright link is far simpler.

Also bear in mind that not all admins are as tech savvy as others, some on here have difficulties with basic stuff and have never used the browser console... 

 

[tajhay]

Also bear in mind that not all admins are as tech savvy as others, some on here have difficulties with basic stuff and have never used the browser console... 

hah yes that is true.

That requires more work in both looking at the source code and then working out from that which author made the theme. A copyright link is far simpler.

What about the proposal of a dedicated copyright page which can be accessed from the footer link. The page can list all addons used by the site, developer and resource page link. That way sites dont have to look fugly with 5 or more copyright links on the footer on all the pages.

 

[Martok]

What about the proposal of a dedicated copyright page which can be accessed from the footer link. The page can list all addons used by the site, developer and resource page link. That way sites dont have to look fugly with 5 or more copyright links on the footer on all the pages.

Personally I think things are fine as they are. Most copyrights don't bother me - I've left the XenForo and Audentio ones on my site. If they bothered me I'd have bought the brand free licence. I understand that its a way to generate income either via branding free or potential referrals.For other add-ons I determine if the copyright is annoying or not and if it is and I don't want to pay, I simply don't use them. I believe Admins voting with their feet like this is a better way than trying to enforce something on add-on creators and making additional work for XenForo staff who would have to police this.

 

[Ridemonkey]

Personally I think things are fine as they are. Most copyrights don't bother me - I've left the XenForo and Audentio ones on my site. If they bothered me I'd have bought the brand free licence. I understand that its a way to generate income either via branding free or potential referrals.For other add-ons I determine if the copyright is annoying or not and if it is and I don't want to pay, I simply don't use them. I believe Admins voting with their feet like this is a better way than trying to enforce something on add-on creators and making additional work for XenForo staff who would have to police this.

I agree with all of this.

I don't think it'd be bad for XF to publish a guideline stating that they recommend the copyright go in that footer block, but this seems like one of those easy choices. If a piece of software meets your needs, you use it. If it doesn't - and those needs might be aesthetic, not just functional - you don't. If you have zero tolerance for these notices, then you should be budgeting for a branding-free option, and if you can't afford it, maybe you should evaluate how important that is to you. I want lots of things I can't afford.

Banishing these notices to a separate page is going to drastically reduce the amount of visibility they get.

 

[FredC]

Love that coders have the freedom here to do just about anything they want to. Customers are just treated as stupid by the people that put extra money in their pocket imo. We purchased a product and then you stick advertisements all over something that we purchased without a single care how it looks and then when we ask you to just pretty It up a little bit some act like we want them removed completely. As if we have no respect for your work.. Coders can change their terms whenever you want to or hot swap owners and just say if you don't like it suck it.

 

[RobParker]

A copyright is our main form of advertisement.

So how much do you pay the site owners for promoting your product to all of their users? ;-)

 

[Dakota Storm]

Popcorn smiley anyone?

 

[Ridemonkey]

So how much do you pay the site owners for promoting your product to all of their users? ;-)

Whatever the delta is between the income they gain from that small bit of advertising, and the current cost of their products.

Basically, they're paying the site owner $50 to put that footer on there, since that's the cost of their branding-free product.

This isn't specific to AD, all of the add-on providers that have a branding-free option are the same.

 

[RobParker]

Whatever the delta is between the income they gain from that small bit of advertising, and the current cost of their products.

Basically, they're paying the site owner $50 to put that footer on there, since that's the cost of their branding-free product.

This isn't specific to AD, all of the add-on providers that have a branding-free option are the same.

You're really not looking at it the right way. The $50 that the branding free costs is priced with the assumption on how many people will pay it. If the only option was branding free then it wouldn't increase the cost of the addons by $50, it'd be more like a $5-10 increase at most to give them the same profit.

 

[Ridemonkey]

You're really not looking at it the right way. The $50 that the branding free costs is priced with the assumption on how many people will pay it. If the only option was branding free then it wouldn't increase the cost of the addons by $50, it'd be more like a $5-10 increase at most to give them the same profit.

The point still stands. You made a sarcastic remark which implies Audentio or other developers are getting free advertising. They are, in fact, not getting free advertising. The advertising is factored into the cost of the product. Not every product developer will weight this advertising the same, and you may or may not agree with the value they place on it, but every site owner gets to make a very easy choice: do I want to pay more for the product I'm buying, or do I want to advertise for the developer?

What about XenForo? They force their branding on every page of the forum, are they not held to the same standard? Their only option could be branding-free, which would spread the cost out over many more licenses.

 

[FredC]

The point still stands. You made a sarcastic remark which implies Audentio or other developers are getting free advertising. They are, in fact, not getting free advertising. The advertising is factored into the cost of the product. Not every product developer will weight this advertising the same, and you may or may not agree with the value they place on it, but every site owner gets to make a very easy choice: do I want to pay more for the product I'm buying, or do I want to advertise for the developer?

What about XenForo? They force their branding on every page of the forum, are they not held to the same standard? Their only option could be branding-free, which would spread the cost out over many more licenses.

I think the post was meant to be a play on the choice of words used such as advertising. I doubt it was a serious question or jab at mike. Some branding free prices are intentionally high to discourage purchasing branding free. Some don't offer the option at all. I don't mind attribution links but I just wish developers took the looks of their customers sites into consideration when crafting their "advertisements" with various placements, fonts and colors. Of course not all plugin authors are guilty of this but it's dissappinting so far only a few here have indicated they are willing to help their customers keep their sites looking nice. Most in this thread anyways just want to justify their action instead of indicating they might be open to some suggestions.

 

[Coop1979]

What about XenForo? They force their branding on every page of the forum, are they not held to the same standard? Their only option could be branding-free, which would spread the cost out over many more licenses.

So, XenForo, which provides the ENTIRE forum software, should get the same amount (and sometimes less) of branding in the footer as a coder who wrote a comparatively small add-on. If I had the copyright my way, it'd be:

Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2015 XenForo Ltd.
Add-on provider page

Then the add-on provider goes to a page with links and 140 characters or less description of each add-on.

 

[Ridemonkey]

I just wish developers took the looks of their customers sites into consideration when crafting their "advertisements" with various placements, fonts and colors.

Just to be clear, I absolutely agree with this.

I just think that XenForo already has a place to put branding notices, and everything else is a matter of customers voting with their wallets. The only add-on I've installed that put a large banner at the bottom of my page got uninstalled immediately. If it wasn't a ******* add-on, I would have contacted the developer and asked about modifying the branding. If the developer had refused, I would have left an appropriately negative review with my opinions.

If developers have a total disregard for their customers' site appearance, watch what happens if they get a bunch of bad reviews and customers refusing to buy their product.

 

[Paul B]

Google suggest any such links should be nofollow.

From 19:47

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfSFcImNFX4#t=1187

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies