View Single Post
  #19  
Unread 05-05-2014, 03:49 PM
moebius92 moebius92 is offline
The Undying
Interface Author - Click to view interfaces
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by magill
It is an interesting discussion --
Note however, that the concept of Copyright does not PREVENT someone from utilizing the material as long as they give credit to the original author.

Were there remuneration involved, then it might be a different story.
That's not quite accurate from my understanding. It's a little bit complicated, but my understanding of the situation is:

1. Author writes a plugin. By the process of creating the plugin, author owns all of the copyrights to the plugin.
2. Author uploads plugin to lotrinterface. Lotrointerface doesn't specifically say which copyrights they acquire, but given that lotrointerface is a plugin distribution site, I think by uploading the plugin, the author implicitly grants lotrointerface the right to distribute the plugin.
3. User downloads the plugin. I don't think lotrointerface uses the software licensing model, so the user actual owns a copy of the plugin. (Which probably means that first sale doctrine applies - so if I understand things correctly, you could, technically sell your copy of a plugin downloaded from lotrointerface, you just wouldn't get to keep your copy after you sold it - since you can only make copies for personal use. Of course, then you could just download another copy from lotrointerface... and digital copies don't play well with first sale doctrine.)

Since lotrointerface doesn't have the right to assign distribution rights, they can't give users the right to distribute the plugin, which would probably be necessary to upload a modified copy. It's basically the difference between the general case of Freeware (distributed for free, but typically with no right to redistribute granted) and freely redistributable software (distributed for free, along with the rights to redistribute).

There may be some wiggle room under Fair Use doctrine, but at that point it's not particularly clear cut. The fact that redistribution wouldn't be for commercial purposes is a point in its favor, but the fact that it's derivative (you're just removing a backdoor) would be a point against it.
Reply With Quote