Our records show that you have outstanding author rewards points. Please confirm your latest payment information and redeem your points balance via the Author Reward Store.
A big reason why I dont use Curse to update my mods is because the 'update addons' page is thick with "Pretty Ponies R Us UI" compilations for every 3rd 8-member guild that thinks for some odd reason, I would be interested in whatever convoluted jumble of addons makes their world go 'round and 'round. Im not. Im there to peruse the list of updated addons for that week. If your little sisterhood of the netherblend pants wants to distribute a new ui suite, use photobucket or email it to each other. Its just clutter that nobody outside of your tiny circle of e-friends is interested in. If this service DOES plan to host them, shuffle them into their own category and put them in their own 'updated' listing. So the rest of us can skip them.
I swear some days, every other updated addon on Curse is Yet Another Compilation For Some Half Dozen Strong Joy Luck Club.
I'd also like to know the answer to this. I don't want my addons included in any kind of compilations, premade UIs, guild packs, or whatever else you want to call them, whether it's manually packaged by the uploader, or dynamically packaged by the site. If you like my addon, and want to share it with other people, give them a link to the download page.
sounds an awful lot like copy right, the internet is for sharing
anyway i believe the OP was talking about core libaries
sounds an awful lot like copy right, the internet is for sharing
anyway i believe the OP was talking about core libaries
Wow! NOW I understand! Since I put my computer on the Internet, it's perfectly alright for someone to install a malicious program which allows them to send spam to everyone on my contact list - because the Internet is for SHARING!
Wow! NOW I understand! Since I put my computer on the Internet, it's perfectly alright for someone to install a malicious program which allows them to send spam to everyone on my contact list - because the Internet is for SHARING!
It's so clear now!
Troll.
Torhal, your example totally fails to prove any point, since it is simply a wrong example. And being scornful to others will not make you right.
On the other hand, addon authors just like any authors have the right to decide if and how they want their work to be distributed and used.
About the maintainance of addon compilations and dynamic or "soft" linking them: between two patches a well written addon does not need to be "maintained". If it works well, its stable and well tested, then it will continue working till the next patch. Maybe the author adds new features in the meantime, but that is another thing.
Good compilations are released when the addons they contain are in this "well tested and stable" state. It is the responsibility of the person who creates the compilation.
And not all of us are "addon junkies", so a lot of ppl actually like to use compilations of all sorts.
Torhal, your example totally fails to prove any point, since it is simply a wrong example. And being scornful to others will not make you right.
On the other hand, addon authors just like any authors have the right to decide if and how they want their work to be distributed and used.
About the maintainance of addon compilations and dynamic or "soft" linking them: between two patches a well written addon does not need to be "maintained". If it works well, its stable and well tested, then it will continue working till the next patch. Maybe the author adds new features in the meantime, but that is another thing.
Good compilations are released when the addons they contain are in this "well tested and stable" state. It is the responsibility of the person who creates the compilation.
And not all of us are "addon junkies", so a lot of ppl actually like to use compilations of all sorts.
No his point is well stated in that the post he was responding to was completely false. Phanx, and other authors, have a RIGHT to ask for their works to be excluded for UI Packs.
but surely that is not bound by law without a proper license to do so? [edit: not too sure but some may even be able to claim it as their own but so long as they dont use it for commercail purposes its legal]
i mean you make an addon for yourself and hopefully others to use, so why does it matter where they get it, its still you as the toc file author. Me, i would be happier knowing that more people can now enjoy my addon
but coding forums are bound to be elitist, i mean just look at the WAU response
but surely that is not bound by law without a proper license to do so? [edit: not too sure but some may even be able to claim it as their own but so long as they dont use it for commercail purposes its legal]
i mean you make an addon for yourself and hopefully others to use, so why does it matter where they get it, its still you as the toc file author. Me, i would be happier knowing that more people can now enjoy my addon
but coding forums are bound to be elitist, i mean just look at the WAU response
The reality is that it is subject to the authors choice. I cannot force them to do one or another.
Even if I don't agree with it I try to respect their right to choose, even as you seem that you'd be more than happy with it as long as they didn't edit your name out of the Toc.
Not to be a butt but should I ask permission before downloading and using your mod too?
You've been given permission to download and use it since it's available for download. You haven't been give permission to redistribute it.
sounds an awful lot like copy right, the internet is for sharing
"0-Dayz Forumz" forums are that way. --> And for the record, the Internet is for communication. Sharing is a benefit, not a requirement.
but coding forums are bound to be elitist, i mean just look at the WAU response
Hi. Welcome to the WoWAce forums. A developer community.
I can see that this will only end up a flame war if it goes too far, but the reality is that anything an author writes/creates is his/hers. They have the right to decide how it's distributed. That you even get to use it is a privilege. With all due respect and not trying to be rude, if you don't like it that's just too bad. /shrug
You've been given permission to download and use it since it's available for download. You haven't been give permission to redistribute it.
"0-Dayz Forumz" forums are that way. --> And for the record, the Internet is for communication. Sharing is a benefit, not a requirement.
Hi. Welcome to the WoWAce forums. A developer community.
I can see that this will only end up a flame war if it goes too far, but the reality is that anything an author writes/creates is his/hers. They have the right to decide how it's distributed. That you even get to use it is a privilege. With all due respect and not trying to be rude, if you don't like it that's just too bad. /shrug
Depends completely on the license. GPL/CC or any other OSI license would grant them the explicit ability to redist till their heart is content.
99% of the stuff here is some OSI license, in which case it's out of the authors control, they can't even revoke the license at a later point (hence OSS forks). Or no license, which I have no idea, IANAL but w/o stating you can/can't do something, and w/o including a notice/copy right/license while releasing it in "human readable form" on the internet... I'd say you'd have one hell of tough time with the legal system retroactively assigning a license to it.
As with anything else in life, the entire debate is a shade of gray. It's neither "The intrewebs r 4 warez" nor is it "author says, so stfu and do what you're told".
Thankfully I'd assume most authors have thought licensing through and assigned one (or implicitly decided not to) to their project that they find morally acceptable.
-neo
P.S. I won't even get in to the specifics of non-licensed software developed via an open source software model used here where multiple authors commonly work on a single product, each with their own possible license for their particular work.
P.P.S. not to start/continue a flame war, but there's a lot more at play than just "I don't like that don't do it cause I say".
Not to be a butt but should I ask permission before downloading and using your mod too?
As StormFX already responded, the answer to this is an obvious "no" as evidenced by the fact that I post it on public addon download sites. If you read the license I include with my addons, it clearly states that you may not redistribute the addon in any form, including in a compilation, unless you first rename it, and that if you do, the new name must not contain the name of my addon or my name.
Basically, you are free to download and use my addon yourself, but you are not allowed to upload it anywhere for others. If you really want to include, say, PhanxChat, in a compilation you're building, you can actually do that -- right after you rename it to, say, ZophielChat, and remove any reference to "PhanxChat" or "Phanx" anywhere in the code.
My goal with this is that you can do whatever you want with my code -- as long as whatever you do does not lead to me spending time trying to provide support for code that I didn't write (i.e. you changed something and distributed your modified version) or for code that is outdated (i.e. you included it in an addon pack six months ago but never updated, even though I've released four updates in that time(.
sounds an awful lot like copy right, the internet is for sharing
It sounds like copyright because it is copyright. Before you continue to exercise your divine right to post misinformation on Internet forums, I suggest you check out the US government's web page with basic information about US copyright law, which is respected and enforced not only in the US, but in most countries around the world.
but surely that is not bound by law without a proper license to do so? [edit: not too sure but some may even be able to claim it as their own but so long as they dont use it for commercail purposes its legal]
i mean you make an addon for yourself and hopefully others to use, so why does it matter where they get it, its still you as the toc file author. Me, i would be happier knowing that more people can now enjoy my addon
but coding forums are bound to be elitist, i mean just look at the WAU response
1. If an addon does not explicitly state any license terms, under US (and many other countries') copyright law it is automatically "all rights reserved" by the addon author, and you have no rights to modify, distribute, or do anything else with the addon besides download it and run it for your own individual personal use. See copyright FAQ link above.
2. It's not about elitism. If you've ever released an addon, you'll know how much time and frustration can stem from trying to provide support to users. Even if the ONLY place users can download your addon is the ONE place you uploaded it, you'll still get support requests for bugs which were fixed months before. You'll still get support requrest from people who didn't read the addon description and can't figure out how to make it do X. Now go to any UI site that allows compilations, and spend even 30 seconds looking at their compilation listing -- look how many compilations are massively outdated, but are still downloaded by dozens of users every day. If your addon is included in even one of those compilations, that's dozens of new users every day who are downloading your addon and are probably stumbling over bugs you fixed long ago.
When they get pissed and delete your addon and tell their friends not to use it, is that a desirable outcome of "more people can enjoy my addon"? I don't think it is.
When they come to your download page and say they just downloaded your addon yesterday and are having Y problem, and you spend hours scratching your head trying to figure out how that problem could still be happening in the latest version as of yesterday, is that a desirable outcome?
When some well-meaning third party adds a feature to your addon and posts the modified version on your guild forums, and you get people asking YOU for support about features you certainly never included in your addon, is that a desirable outcome?
When it comes down to it, my license is very reasonable. It allows you to do absolutely anything you want with the code I wrote, as long as you completely remove my name and my addon's name from the code so that I don't get support requests for code I didn't distribute.
Or no license, which I have no idea, IANAL but w/o stating you can/can't do something, and w/o including a notice/copy right/license while releasing it in "human readable form" on the internet... I'd say you'd have one hell of tough time with the legal system retroactively assigning a license to it.
See the copyright FAQ I linked above. If an addon does not explicitly state its license terms, it is automatically copyrighted to its author with all rights reserved. You do not need to stamp a copyright notice on it, or include a copy of US copyright law with it. In essence, "no license" is the most restrictive license of all, giving you no rights to do anything with the code. Specific licenses, even if they're not open-source-compatible, can really only give you more rights.
No his point is well stated in that the post he was responding to was completely false. Phanx, and other authors, have a RIGHT to ask for their works to be excluded for UI Packs.
Kaelten, I totally agree with you in that authors have the right to control the distribution / re-distribution / use / etc. of their work. As I said in that post
On the other hand, addon authors just like any authors have the right to decide if and how they want their work to be distributed and used.
Actually, I really don't understand some ppl's attitude that is like "it is free, so I am free to do anything I want with it." Well, you are not. The author has put a hard work in that mod or graphic or anything else, and he is giving you right to download and use it, but you must respect his rights. Take it or leave it. Simply as 1x1.
And because it is publicly available and you don't need to pay for it, the least you can do is to respect these rights!
(On the other hand, sometimes the atmosphere really starts to be hostile and abusive on the forums when these questions are discussed, which is sad.)
Kaelten, I totally agree with you in that authors have the right to control the distribution / re-distribution / use / etc. of their work. As I said in that post
Actually, I really don't understand some ppl's attitude that is like "it is free, so I am free to do anything I want with it." Well, you are not. The author has put a hard work in that mod or graphic or anything else, and he is giving you right to download and use it, but you must respect his rights. Take it or leave it. Simply as 1x1.
And because it is publicly available and you don't need to pay for it, the least you can do is to respect these rights!
(On the other hand, sometimes the atmosphere really starts to be hostile and abusive on the forums when these questions are discussed, which is sad.)
The hostility comes about largely due to people feeling they're entitled to do what they want with an addon no matter what. That and during patch week everyone's tension runs high.
On another hand, Not only do I choose to side with the authors on this issue of whether they can opt-out of packs, I also will do so despite of what their license states.
eh copy right laws from the US effect me in the UK? maybe if its being distrubeted from the US but all others i dont have to worry then.
but srsly, you copyright your addons?
darkeh, copyright laws are complicated and I don't think you really want to start getting in deep into that stuff. But yes, you need to obey the UK copyright rules - that harmonize with the EU rules since UK is part of EU - that take into consideration the international issues. So in some way you will need to obey certain universal copyright laws, despite where you live.
But more important than that, you should feel that it is morally wrong to abuse other peoples' rights. You really cannot fell it?
Would be nice if such moral guidelines would actually matter to people (again).
On another hand, Not only do I choose to side with the authors on this issue of whether they can opt-out of packs, I also will do so despite of what their license states.
A question about granularity of the proposed ui pack system if I may;
The UI Pack developers are acting some what like an Open Source OS distributor (RedHat/Debian/Canonical/etc). They're bundling things in to an end product that is at least in the spirit of the original works.
I would instruct UI Pack devs to research the licensing of the AddOns with in their packs, just as the above entities must. Further, unlicensed addons would require them to seek the authors explicit approval for its use. Anything that is too strict to allow its redistribution would require the UI Pack dev to find an accommodating alternative, or author a replacement with a suitable license on their own.
In this case, say the OP has figured out that his pack is mostly GPL/BSD licensed, and actually got permission from the unlicensed addon's authors to redistribute. Would there then be a method to get those addons back in for that specific compilation?
i.e. If say Phanx opted out of UI compilations in general, could he specifically opt-in to specific ones that have gotten his permission?
Visa versa, if an author opted in to UI compilations in general, then found a compilation that blatantly offended their better sensibilities, could they specifically opt-out of that specific compilation?
I'm confused. If addons in a compilation are linked to the same downloads that people are using to download the addons individually then supporting addons in compilations is no different than supporting addons downloaded outside of them. They are the same files, just downloaded slightly differently. The same support issues apply, no? I trying to see the difference in supporting one or the other, other than volume.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
you must not have been around for a while mate.
I've kicked all those off more than a month ago.
sounds an awful lot like copy right, the internet is for sharing
anyway i believe the OP was talking about core libaries
It is copy right and it is her right.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Project AuthorWow! NOW I understand! Since I put my computer on the Internet, it's perfectly alright for someone to install a malicious program which allows them to send spam to everyone on my contact list - because the Internet is for SHARING!
It's so clear now!
Troll.
Torhal, your example totally fails to prove any point, since it is simply a wrong example. And being scornful to others will not make you right.
On the other hand, addon authors just like any authors have the right to decide if and how they want their work to be distributed and used.
About the maintainance of addon compilations and dynamic or "soft" linking them: between two patches a well written addon does not need to be "maintained". If it works well, its stable and well tested, then it will continue working till the next patch. Maybe the author adds new features in the meantime, but that is another thing.
Good compilations are released when the addons they contain are in this "well tested and stable" state. It is the responsibility of the person who creates the compilation.
And not all of us are "addon junkies", so a lot of ppl actually like to use compilations of all sorts.
No his point is well stated in that the post he was responding to was completely false. Phanx, and other authors, have a RIGHT to ask for their works to be excluded for UI Packs.
i mean you make an addon for yourself and hopefully others to use, so why does it matter where they get it, its still you as the toc file author. Me, i would be happier knowing that more people can now enjoy my addon
but coding forums are bound to be elitist, i mean just look at the WAU response
The reality is that it is subject to the authors choice. I cannot force them to do one or another.
Even if I don't agree with it I try to respect their right to choose, even as you seem that you'd be more than happy with it as long as they didn't edit your name out of the Toc.
Phanx and some others will not see it that way.
i do remember having to find an old version of xperl from a ui pack that wasnt updated when my current version wudnt work, so all is not lost on them
maybe just have a report out of date function on the site?
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse Premium"0-Dayz Forumz" forums are that way. --> And for the record, the Internet is for communication. Sharing is a benefit, not a requirement.
Hi. Welcome to the WoWAce forums. A developer community.
I can see that this will only end up a flame war if it goes too far, but the reality is that anything an author writes/creates is his/hers. They have the right to decide how it's distributed. That you even get to use it is a privilege. With all due respect and not trying to be rude, if you don't like it that's just too bad. /shrug
Depends completely on the license. GPL/CC or any other OSI license would grant them the explicit ability to redist till their heart is content.
99% of the stuff here is some OSI license, in which case it's out of the authors control, they can't even revoke the license at a later point (hence OSS forks). Or no license, which I have no idea, IANAL but w/o stating you can/can't do something, and w/o including a notice/copy right/license while releasing it in "human readable form" on the internet... I'd say you'd have one hell of tough time with the legal system retroactively assigning a license to it.
As with anything else in life, the entire debate is a shade of gray. It's neither "The intrewebs r 4 warez" nor is it "author says, so stfu and do what you're told".
Thankfully I'd assume most authors have thought licensing through and assigned one (or implicitly decided not to) to their project that they find morally acceptable.
-neo
P.S. I won't even get in to the specifics of non-licensed software developed via an open source software model used here where multiple authors commonly work on a single product, each with their own possible license for their particular work.
P.P.S. not to start/continue a flame war, but there's a lot more at play than just "I don't like that don't do it cause I say".
As StormFX already responded, the answer to this is an obvious "no" as evidenced by the fact that I post it on public addon download sites. If you read the license I include with my addons, it clearly states that you may not redistribute the addon in any form, including in a compilation, unless you first rename it, and that if you do, the new name must not contain the name of my addon or my name.
Basically, you are free to download and use my addon yourself, but you are not allowed to upload it anywhere for others. If you really want to include, say, PhanxChat, in a compilation you're building, you can actually do that -- right after you rename it to, say, ZophielChat, and remove any reference to "PhanxChat" or "Phanx" anywhere in the code.
My goal with this is that you can do whatever you want with my code -- as long as whatever you do does not lead to me spending time trying to provide support for code that I didn't write (i.e. you changed something and distributed your modified version) or for code that is outdated (i.e. you included it in an addon pack six months ago but never updated, even though I've released four updates in that time(.
It sounds like copyright because it is copyright. Before you continue to exercise your divine right to post misinformation on Internet forums, I suggest you check out the US government's web page with basic information about US copyright law, which is respected and enforced not only in the US, but in most countries around the world.
1. If an addon does not explicitly state any license terms, under US (and many other countries') copyright law it is automatically "all rights reserved" by the addon author, and you have no rights to modify, distribute, or do anything else with the addon besides download it and run it for your own individual personal use. See copyright FAQ link above.
2. It's not about elitism. If you've ever released an addon, you'll know how much time and frustration can stem from trying to provide support to users. Even if the ONLY place users can download your addon is the ONE place you uploaded it, you'll still get support requests for bugs which were fixed months before. You'll still get support requrest from people who didn't read the addon description and can't figure out how to make it do X. Now go to any UI site that allows compilations, and spend even 30 seconds looking at their compilation listing -- look how many compilations are massively outdated, but are still downloaded by dozens of users every day. If your addon is included in even one of those compilations, that's dozens of new users every day who are downloading your addon and are probably stumbling over bugs you fixed long ago.
When they get pissed and delete your addon and tell their friends not to use it, is that a desirable outcome of "more people can enjoy my addon"? I don't think it is.
When they come to your download page and say they just downloaded your addon yesterday and are having Y problem, and you spend hours scratching your head trying to figure out how that problem could still be happening in the latest version as of yesterday, is that a desirable outcome?
When some well-meaning third party adds a feature to your addon and posts the modified version on your guild forums, and you get people asking YOU for support about features you certainly never included in your addon, is that a desirable outcome?
When it comes down to it, my license is very reasonable. It allows you to do absolutely anything you want with the code I wrote, as long as you completely remove my name and my addon's name from the code so that I don't get support requests for code I didn't distribute.
See the copyright FAQ I linked above. If an addon does not explicitly state its license terms, it is automatically copyrighted to its author with all rights reserved. You do not need to stamp a copyright notice on it, or include a copy of US copyright law with it. In essence, "no license" is the most restrictive license of all, giving you no rights to do anything with the code. Specific licenses, even if they're not open-source-compatible, can really only give you more rights.
Kaelten, I totally agree with you in that authors have the right to control the distribution / re-distribution / use / etc. of their work. As I said in that post
Actually, I really don't understand some ppl's attitude that is like "it is free, so I am free to do anything I want with it." Well, you are not. The author has put a hard work in that mod or graphic or anything else, and he is giving you right to download and use it, but you must respect his rights. Take it or leave it. Simply as 1x1.
And because it is publicly available and you don't need to pay for it, the least you can do is to respect these rights!
(On the other hand, sometimes the atmosphere really starts to be hostile and abusive on the forums when these questions are discussed, which is sad.)
The hostility comes about largely due to people feeling they're entitled to do what they want with an addon no matter what. That and during patch week everyone's tension runs high.
On another hand, Not only do I choose to side with the authors on this issue of whether they can opt-out of packs, I also will do so despite of what their license states.
but srsly, you copyright your addons?
darkeh, copyright laws are complicated and I don't think you really want to start getting in deep into that stuff. But yes, you need to obey the UK copyright rules - that harmonize with the EU rules since UK is part of EU - that take into consideration the international issues. So in some way you will need to obey certain universal copyright laws, despite where you live.
But more important than that, you should feel that it is morally wrong to abuse other peoples' rights. You really cannot fell it?
Would be nice if such moral guidelines would actually matter to people (again).
Most of the developers using copyright for their addons. Why are you surprised?
A question about granularity of the proposed ui pack system if I may;
The UI Pack developers are acting some what like an Open Source OS distributor (RedHat/Debian/Canonical/etc). They're bundling things in to an end product that is at least in the spirit of the original works.
I would instruct UI Pack devs to research the licensing of the AddOns with in their packs, just as the above entities must. Further, unlicensed addons would require them to seek the authors explicit approval for its use. Anything that is too strict to allow its redistribution would require the UI Pack dev to find an accommodating alternative, or author a replacement with a suitable license on their own.
In this case, say the OP has figured out that his pack is mostly GPL/BSD licensed, and actually got permission from the unlicensed addon's authors to redistribute. Would there then be a method to get those addons back in for that specific compilation?
i.e. If say Phanx opted out of UI compilations in general, could he specifically opt-in to specific ones that have gotten his permission?
Visa versa, if an author opted in to UI compilations in general, then found a compilation that blatantly offended their better sensibilities, could they specifically opt-out of that specific compilation?