I am becoming increasingly angry about the number of sites I am finding who use open source or freeware scripts like phpLD or freeware templates and remove the copyright notice and/or link back to the authors. This is unethical, immoral, and illegal. If you do this, you are by implication claiming something as your own which you did not create. It is no different than piracy or plagiarism. You are proclaiming to the rest of the world that you are a cheap cheating bottom feeder. I just found another one this morning and now I'm angry enough to suggest that we start publicly denouncing the people who do this. Here's the one I discovered today: site: http://www.abc.md/ contact: "Sergey" My suggestion is that we add to this list as we find these sites. Maybe we can embarrass these thieves into acknowledging the people that put hard work into creating the scripts and templates and software that they are able to use at no cost.
Yeah. That's a great script too. The guy gives it away free out of his own kindness. He, at the very least, deserves his linkback and acknowledgement.
Yeah I am starting to see this more often the more I learn about this stuff. I agree about the name and shame of violaters - should this go up into the suggestion section? http://www.search-group.com/ < Is another site of theirs.
If you look closely enough, they have it in the copyright line. Putting it there, however, sort of makes it look like it's their script.
I swear these must be 12 yr old kids doing this kind of bullsh*t. What's crazy is all the ones I've seen removing the links from the script have not really altered the template in any real way, maybe they throw up a logo. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that you are using PHPLD. What I wonder is this? Why do these people feel the need to remove the links to PHPLD and/or whoever designed their template? Is that link causing them some great harm? If they don't want to link to someone, why are these sorry mother stickers running a friggin' directory in the first place?! The same guy owns this one which is not linking back: http://www.casino-777.com/ These two from same guy have a link, but it's done in such a way that one would almost think PHPLD is another one of HIS sites: http://www.abcdirectory.net/ http://www.abcz.org/
Why is every one giving them all back-links??!!! There is a no follow vBuletin code if you want a link!!! [url]URL[/url]] [url=URL]Anchor Text[/url]]
You don't have to link back to PHP Links, but if you do that you won't receive free support. That's stated on their site somewhere.
What is the license? Most of the cases there is none meaning you have no legal right to distribute or use the package. But the package is intended to be used. So what? Unethical? Not really. Immoral? Depends on your moral. Illegal ? No (To use it is illegal, to modify it is not) In fact, I agree with you but I just say: don't release something without a license (or don't complain).
Only because there's little the creators can do to enforce the acknowledgement except withdraw support. That doesn't mean they're ok with NOT acknowledging who created the script. 1. it is not illegal to use it OR to modify it 2. it is both unethical and immoral by anyone who rfecognizes the basic concept of give credit where credit is due 3. open source software has an implied license even if it is not explicitly stated 4. since you state that you agree with me, what the hell was the point of your post?
To the idiot who red repped me for this comment, I just have to ask why? Are you against someone getting due credit for their hard work?
Minstrel - help me out (I can wield a knife, make confit, and teach 82nd airborne how to subdue some asshole, but I can't yet speak with any degree of intelligence da' "web"). Are you saying that the abc medical directory uses a freeware template, which asks for a footer acknowledgement or something like it, and Sergey and ABC removed the acknowledgement - and this is the source of ire?
Pretty much, except it was the directory script itself - the coding that created the directory that Sergey used. It should say: Those are the people who created the script. Instead it says:
Not cool. How do you know what script is being used? The look or layout of the directory itself? source code?
Both. But in this case, the site owners didn't even bother to modify or disguise the design. It's a direct and blatant ripoff.
northpointaiki - having served with the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), US Army Criminal Investigation Command, and the 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne) your comments caught my attention ... however, to the point ... It would appear that the "powered by" statement at the bottom is a blatant attempt to 1) take credit for building the website and probably stick this on all sites that they have a hand in; and 2) also take credit for the directory, script et al although it's not spelled out as such, a novice would easily find that it's implied. Ever wonder how phpBB got a PR9? It's not because Google gave them a PR10 link on the homepage - it's because it's in the footer of their script that they freely distribute ... it's a form of recognition that's due them, the same case here that Minstrel is making I think.
WRMineo - thank you for your service. Defensive tactics with members of the CPD, 82nd, and tribal personnel up our way - never worked with members of the 101st. Curious on your training methods...subject of a PM, perhaps. Hats off. On the subject of this thread. Kudos for finding it and right to condemn it.
Are you the author of these scripts and templates? If not, have you contacted the Authors or the owner of these sites about this and asked them if they have permission to remove the links? I am asking because it is not clear for me how do you know that they are doing anything illegal or unethical?
In a lot of countries, it is illegal to use a copyrighted work without permission. However, it is often legal to modify it.[/QUOTE] Check this site, they give credit where credit is not due. Wrong. There is no such implied license (I'm a professional open-source developper). In fact, open-source is defined by and only by its license. Anything without a license is standard copyrighted material that can not be used. Because I agree on the spirit of our post but disagree on your arguments (and on the fact to link bad guys). For example, you're pointing to a moldavian website. But do you know it is probably legal in Moldavia? They have not the same copyright laws. PS: my reputation is getting low on this forum, I may not be able to answer you...
I've contacted Sergey, as my site was part of the directory and this was of concern to me. He indicated that the script was free, he did not employ anyone for the work, and he did not fully understand my question (which was to ask him re: the subject of this thread). I asked to have my site link removed. As much as I appreciate and could use the link, I agree that ethically the creators of the work deserve their credit. Paul
No. I am not connected with them in any way. No. They must or should already know that what they are doing is unethical. I am making a general point (see post #1) about such practices becoming distressingly more common. It is unacceptable and I think there needs to be some negative publicity and education about the practice. I use the same script for my psychology directory. There is no question that they are using phpLD. And there is no question that they are not the creators of phpLD.