How can I prove that I'm the original and only owner of a site's script? So that if someone is reselling it illegaly without my permission I can prove it and report him.
Wouldnt the old post it to yourself by recorded delivery and get a solicitor to store it for you work?
You can register the copyright of the software with the US Copyright office: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ61.pdf In the US, posting it to yourself does not provide you any special legal protection, so I wouldn't bother.
Very true . But unfortunately, not everyone is an experienced user like you. I'm sure Shawn makes money in this very forum with adsense clicks.Which means even in a technical webmaster site, there are people who click adsense ads. Made sense ?? No ??
I thought it was pretty obviously a pdf since the full URL is visible - no need to look at the status bar at all. Don't people look at the URLs before clicking them? Anyway, if you don't like pdfs, here is a link to the US Copyright Office: http://copyright.gov/ What you are looking for is how to copyright software. Be warned that much of their detailed information is in the form of pdf files.
put your copyright in the code on all the files. put something like <----------DO NOT REMOVE DATABASE STATS made by etc.......-----------> once people see the word database they normally will be afraid to edit it.
So you quoted the live link and that's OK... but the original reference is bad for bandwidth??? Getting rid of avatars would save 100000% more on bandwidth than a few people clicking in a PDF link.
No! You didn't get it ! I assumed people would talk on the webmaster's / website owners perspective. My fault! There are sites which explicitly state that you shouldn't link to the files directly on their site. You will be feeding on their bandwidth without the visitor even visiting their site. Would you like that if it was your site. I hope its clear now.
...a "dot.gov" site won't ever have that problem with that... especially one with 1.36 million links to the same source.
Now I'm confused what you meant. I thought you were referring to the fact that some people can't view pdf files in their browsers, thus they end up with a download. The pdf file wasn't hotlinked or embedded in the forum, so it's not leeching bandwith. I suppose directly linking to a file could annoy a webmaster if it were an ebook or something like that. However, what I linked to is a circular - a flier - produced by the government for distribution. It's meant to be linked to.
Do you check the spelling before posting?? In this specific case, it is okay. But generally, it is not the best practice. Alright! The issue is closed. Its simple. Most people will understand what i said and I now understand why the live link in this case is Okay after he explained. There are sites that don't allow hotlinking images from theirs. I do understand that its a .Gov website and i agreed that its okay in this case. I agreed and once again agree that it was a mistake from my part for not realizing (UK) / realising (US) that it was linking to a .Gov website. It happens some times , alright! Like a typo.hmmm...
No problem I hope WebAutomated got the answer he was looking for. Come back to the thread WebAutomated!