There is a lot of talk about "ripping", broadly meaning when someone uses/edits another's code or skin or graphics without proper permission or without proper credit. I'd like to get some opinions on ripping. Just what constitutes ripping and what are the gray areas?

Yes, it is right to honor copyrights and give proper credit to people for using their work. I have no arguments with that. I do have a problem though, with coders/skinners who seem to have an unreasonable grip on work they have "released" for others to use.

Where I have questions is about getting permissions when creators are no longer reachable, or their hosting websites have been taken offline. What happens then? Is the code/skin dead and should never be used again?

What about authors who host codes or images with notes in the copyright that the codes cannot be rehosted, reposted or edited without permission? And then they are no longer available to ask for permission? Are those codes not ever to be shared or customized again? What if someone has hosted the code for themselves, but now since the main host and hosting site is unreachable....is it ethical for that person to offer the rehosted code to others?

What about simple edits to copyrighted codes? Is that considered allowable? Or is it something that cannot be done without permission on a copyrighted code? If it is OK, how much can you edit before it becomes not OK? What about little snippets of code written for request topics? Is there any problem with sharing those freely?

I would love hear opinions about this. Everyone's thoughts on this are important, because this is a community issue, but I'd especially like to hear from some of our coders. Just what do you think is right and fair? I'm not interested in getting into the legal issues....but would like to know how you want others to respect your work, and what you consider acceptable customization of your codes and graphic work.

[edit to merge posts, 8-17-07]: hmmm.....this topic has been up for a week and no comments? Either no one cares about this, or it's such a sore subject no one wants to be the first to say anything.

I think it all depends on circumstances, but as long as you respect the creator it's usually ok. If you want to modify a code, but cant contact the author, at least give them credit. That's what I did when I first started improving on Epsilekt's shoutbox. Originally when I wasn't able to get his permission because he never came on. So for a while I just used his support topic to show it to others. After a while I did make my own, but even so I always gave him credit first and would correct people who complimented me. Eventually he did come back, but he told me he was fine with it. However, had he asked me to stop then I would have done so immediately.

That's just my opinion though.

I think it actually happens that way a lot. Sometimes it's easier to get forgiveness than permission. :)

Exactly, and many times you never have to. Sometimes they never come back, in which case they wont be there to care.

What I think is the real shame is that there have been some brilliant codes written, and the creators insisted that people use their hosted versions, and do not give permission for users to host the codes themselves. Then, the code creator drops out of site, the links are not good anymore, and the code is no longer useable---unless someone has copied it before it disappeared.

So, then, is it ethical in that case, to host the code yourself and use the code? Or not?

Under those circumstances, I would say so, as long as you don't make profit off of it. The thing is, to what extent does the power of a copyright really apply? What if javascript was a new language, and someone decided to copyright the "if" statement, and said that no one can use it. Could they really do that? These codes are only pieces of a language that's open to the public.

Having made a lot of items, tubes, mists and other graphics to use online I am very much against ripping.

I put my watermark on EVERYTHING I make from graphics to tubes and mists, and I do expect credit for what I've made. I mean if you are using a tube or mist that I made you do not have to give me credit in your creation for using it, but I do not want my file names changed on my items so that you can redistribute them and claim you made them. In some instances tubing an image can take hours or even days to do it properly. Also I do not want my original work altered in anyway.

Now, when it comes to coding and the disappearance of the original creator I don't know. I think credit needs to be given where credit is due. If you use someone's code as a base for yours you MUST/SHOULD give credit for the use of the other code. But I think what is it like 40% has to be different from the original code and you can claim it as your own? I don't recall exactly off the top of my head.

There is also this: US Copyright Office - Fair Use Act. Have a read there, it says you can use the things you find online...so...I guess it's all relevant to the person. I just don't personally want people taking credit for the stuff I worked so hard on...

SIM

I agree, under no circumstances should you claim someone else's work as your own. As for in codes and modifying them; if there is any part of the code that was created by someone else, give them the credit they deserve.

Yes, I totally agree with this! People work hard on these things whether they are graphics or codes and they deserve the credit that is due to them.:)

I should also add to this, I do not want them altered without my express permission. I very rarely will allow it, but on some occasions I might. I also would get people asking me for blank tags when I'd make them. Meaning that they'd want the tag with all the work but no name on it, so they could go in and add the name to it. However, I've seen a lot of people who allowed this get their word ripped or for those who put the name on it taking credit for the whole thing...it's just something I don't do...too much risk.


SIM

Personally I feel that if you don't want your work used then you shouldn't post it on a site that is intended to share them. Once you put your work on such a site you pretty much relinquish ownership of them. And someone finding your code worth altering is really more of a compliment than anything else.

Now having said that I would never remove copyrights. And would probably never put code in my board that is hosted somewhere else. Wouldn't it be possible for the creator to then replace that hosted code with something malicious? :huh:

I totally agree with what you say mate. I think some coders they're just not sure what they really want. Their initial plan of coding might be to share with people but at the same time they also want fame. When they find their code is not as popular as expected, they tend to disappear themselves and leaving some of us with a big question mark. :r

That's an excellent point that I doubt many people even consider.

I do understand the point of not wanting people to host your codes themselves. It does give the creator the opportunity to make fixes and updates that everyone who uses the code benefits from. However, it also creates the kinds of problems I've been talking about.

In fact, there was a situation just today when someone bumped the empty topic for CrAzy_J's Quick Edit code. The copyright on the code says not to redistribute, rehost or edit without his permission. Well the problem with that is that he has dropped out of site. And the site where he hosted the code is no longer viable. So what does one do in that situation? Take a look at the topic and see if you think I did the right thing.
http://support.invisionfree.com/index.php?showtopic=277918

I think so. If he doesn't want his code used he should have come back and removed the links and code or posted that he didn't want it used.


If you post it on a board intended to share code you shouldn't be surprised if it is shared.

I would like to have posted a hosted version of the code, because anyone that uses it is not going to want have that whole code pasted in their wrappers. They are going to host the code anyway to use it. Which then brings up the question of whether that is ethical or not.

It seems to me that if somebody creates a code and later makes him/herself unavailable to answer questions, permission requests, or doesn't follow up on promised fixes or tweaks, then that code can be considered abandoned.

HelenaZF, I would say in this case that you have simply claimed "salvage rights." It doesn't mean you're claiming you did the original work -- you're just finding and restoring it. :yes: