Printable View
I will indeed ask our lawyers about language that clarifies this
If you can do this then you will go some way to reassuring us. However, we are talking a major rewrite. The bottom line for me is this: if I feel that I need to consult my lawyer about any of the implications then I won't bother to risk it (you wouldn't believe how much our lawyer charges <g>!)
Robin Leatherbarrow
If your lawyers write something so convoluted that I have to ask our company to use its attorneys to interpret it (i.e., 20 words will suffice), then will Earthweb pick up the $200/hour it costs us? If there is --ANY-- ambiguity or need for clarification I won't risk it and I'm history on this page.
That's exactly the point. When the author gives permission, we cannot restrict it. We can however restrict the use of the HTML page. This means that if you want to create a mirror or distribute the HTML page, you need permission. We have no control over the source code itself.
That's exactly the point. When the author gives permission, we cannot restrict it. We can however restrict the use of the HTML page. This means that if you want to create a mirror or distribute the HTML page, you need permission. We have no control over the source code itself.
Hi Zafir
I understand that for anyone posting code or an article on this site has no problems - they still retain full Copyright to their code or article. My problem is the wording when it comes to reuse by others who would wish to use the code in their commercial applications. If the author of the code wishes to place limitations on their code or article they should be permitted to add that to the article or inside the code in a disclaimer. Lack of a disclaimer would suggest that they are relinquishing their ownership of the code and making it public propery.
The wording of the Terms & Conditions is very straight forward:
All pages within this Internet site ("Site") are the property of EarthWeb Inc. Permission (which may be revoked at any time) is granted to download the material in this Site without alterations and for private and non-commercial use only so long as the following copyright notice is included: Copyright 1996, 1997, 1998 EarthWeb Inc. All Rights Reserved
This does not diferentiate between code owned by EarthWeb or code owned by any third parties (the original authors) - so it would read in its present form that any and all Site content may not be used for anything but private and non-commercial use - and if it is used, then the user would have to add the EarthWeb copyright notice. This should be reworded to differentiate between Site content whose copyright is owned by EarthWeb and any disclaimers which may appear in a third party's article.
As for the Permission page, it states:
Please note: Not all materials on the EarthWeb sites are owned by EarthWeb. Rather, some materials may be licensed by EarthWeb from third parties. The policies outlined in these pages apply only to materials owned by EarthWeb Inc..
Therefore none of its limitations on this page should apply to any web content for which they do not own the copyright, so there is no problem (that I can see) with the wording there.
I'm sure EarthWeb's lawyers will be able to check this all out and reword it to fall in line with your original sentiment.
Best regards.
Rail
------------
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://home.earthlink.net/~railro/
[email protected]
That's the problem with legal documents. They try to remove ambiguity and in the process make it very verbose. If you go through the agreement for any software (including VC++ or Java), you'll note that they are even more complex.
I've given my opinion on what this means for whatever it's worth. If you want a lawyers opinion, it will be some more legalese. I wish things were simpler.
That's the problem with legal documents. They try to remove ambiguity and in the process make it very verbose. If you go through the agreement for any software (including VC++ or Java), you'll note that they are even more complex.
I've given my opinion on what this means for whatever it's worth. If you want a lawyers opinion, it will be some more legalese. I wish things were simpler.
We seem to have taken more words in our Terms & Conditions to describe all this, but the reality is still the same.
So change them. In a separate post you say that you will get your legal people to look into things "after the holiday weekend." In other threads the message is that we should all not worry about any hidden implications in your Terms & Conditions. Surely you appreciate the contradiction here? While you hide behind the legal jargon, we should take everything on trust....
If the site really is the same as the old CodeGuru then why not have exactly the same terms and conditions? If you don't then the reality is not "still the same."
Robin Leatherbarrow
Thanks for clarifying that Zafir,
-Rgrds
-prabha
OK, about information to "@" address, now it's working, but missing the addres (blue one :) to the replay post of CG site) where I clicked and automatically put me to the original replay at CG.
(Of coarse, I'm still want, ok, wish to put somwhere to fix place buttons (arrows) for prev./next/home and it'll be nice also the same thing for -hm- status bar ("Forum Index / FAQ/ Edit Profile/ Send Private/ Check Private/ Search/ Logout). Now it scrolls togeather with message.)
Thank you.
Kirk,
Codeguru.developer.com is history as far as its appeal is concerned. There will be no more new content posted there. The gurus who once wrote useful articles will no longer have pleasure in writing them for this low level dump Earthweb has managed to create in a matter of hours. The only thing that will keep people coming back once in a while is code snippet here and there.
You are perhaps in one of the best positions to act quickly and fill in the role Codeguru once filled. But lest you forget what brought the site popularity in the first place... grassroot efforts with clean pages and a great forum: no clutter, no filthe.
It's perfectly okay to make a buck providing this service. Everyone would do it. But a site would be far more valuable if it put one or two ads on each useful page. Just charge more for those fewer ads.
As a side note, I'm amazed and pleased to see the speed and uniformity in which everyone has responded to this acquisition. I don't mind Earthweb owning Codeguru. I just wished they got majority or full share and left the site alone. It's quite hilarious actually... the style which Zafir had created as a small-time individual is far greater than the style quality of these brain-dead drones Earthweb has in its orginization.
Hello there,
Even if we need a solution Kirk and his "Portion by ...." of codes 70% written by others is not a way to go. Works are far advance now to put a free library in place for everyone to contribute and use freely. It is simply selfish trying to take credit for what is not wholly yours. The codejocking site has being there all this time and except newbies no one really cares, so the attempt to use this Zafir's mistake or just lack of forsight is not acceptable, period.
Kirk pack-off.
But do you accept the copyright of the library you publish from codes which do not belong to you?
Similarly, your selfish altitude will not permit those old-timers of the codeguru site to join you either. Just pack-off, instead of trying to take advantage of the current situation.
We will not make the same mistake again. We will now look carefully before we leap..
Yes. We need a independent site. Every guru has its limitations. But we don't know the limitations of codejack till he sells everything to earth web too...
Hello Developpers,
my analyisis of the situation
About Zafir
1) From the viewpoint of marketing Zafir has done a big mistake. He has created a product and has gotten a group of clients which use his product (and looked at his banners). Now he has changed the product without markt survey and without asking the clients about the future. He will loose a part of his clients and i fear he will loose the most important part of his clients: the authors. Authors are very sensible about the use of their code because each code fragment is created in a very difficult process, somtimes it is the work of weeks or even months or years. Nobody sends his results to somebody who does not take care about this and who wants to make cash with it.
2) Zafir has destroyed in one day the confidence which was he has build up during all years in a very careful way. It is like Mercedes when they would suddently create cheap cars without quality. It is only possible to get back the confidence from his former clients when Zafir tells us about his mistake, why he has made the mistake and when he goes back to the original state, when he was independent and didn't had somebody to ask about the copyright of the codefragments of the authors... When he is independent again he can develop codeguru further, but should take care of the clients by making surveys and by listening to wishes as formulated by incomming mail.
3) So Zafir has made a big mistake when he thinks the site has been moved when he technically moved the codefragments of the authors to another server. I think the readers will do the move because they are happy when they find anywhere a solution to their burning problem. But the authors won't do the move because they cannot trust Zafir any longer. We don't know what Zafir will do next. It is now possible he will leave us all and go surfing in Hawai, leaving us in the rain with developper.com.
My thoughts about us
1) We all made a big error when we have send code fragments and comments to a one person site. This person can do with this collection of code what he wants: Selling it to others, changing the rules etc. We now need a non profit organisation.
2) If we look back into the history we can see the same when we see how the church and gurus have occupied areas which were new to the people. Think of the catholic church and astronomy. Open source is new for us all and so we are happy somebody helps us here. Thanks Zafir! - But it is time for us to get independent. Everything will be more chaotic now, but in this chaos new ideas can develop which cannot be developped if somebody is the chief or a guru.
My thoughts about the future
1) The idea to share our code with others is good for us all. See Linux and the development of the `open source`. If we share our code we can learn from each other which is far better than beeing alone with the a problems others have too. This way it is also possible to solve a new problem in a good way because other problems are already solved by others.
2) We all have little time to write papers. So we all have a lot of code which we want to share but which we cannot share because we don't have the time to write nice texts about it and more important: To get the fragments indepentent of other code parts which is not important for the others. What we need too: A site where we can send FREE codefragments, with some comments only. This would be an important source for finding ideas how to solve a problem. Sometimes it is enough for us to see how somebody has solved a similar problem. We don't always need well documented independent code which can be used for all, code from a guru
3) After i have seen codeguru i personally have changed my way of developping source code. I started to write code which is complete independent and where the modules can be contributed to codegure. This is not easy, there are a lot of books written about modularisation of software. I think others have the same problem. So we need a platform for a serious discussion about: 1) How to make existing code independent from other modules. 2) How to write code which solve our problems AND which can be contributed to others
4) What we need to is better index to find the code. I have often searched a long time in codeguru.com to find the code in codeguru. What we need is a multi-dimensional index. Examples are platforms (for example Win16/Win32/WinNT code), controls which are part of the codefragment, type of problem which which is solved (optimation of code, idea only, replacements etc), mfc used/not used, new controls etc.
5) I would prefer a more anarchic way how we can contribute our code to other developpers
I don't know solutions yet. But this is normal for us. We all first start with an analysis!
Sorry for the spelling errors i have made
Ernst Versteeg
[email protected]
Switzerland