Factory sites (F. CMS) lost the court
I'm Sure many active MODX developers heard about the "Factory sites". These are the guys that made the copy engine of MODX Revolution, called it F. CMS and rivet on it the sites, posing for your own engine. But besides the fact that they took a third-party opensource engine, they also "borrowed" various third-party modules, just renamed them and sell as their own, not without any authorship. Among the victims — andchir and bezumkin. Last wrote about this situation pretty long and detailed.
Last year I had to face a couple of clients whose websites are long and hopelessly was developed in the Factory. One of the sites was redesigned and the results were written a detailed topic, where I judged the quality of the work performed by said company. And Yes, I transferred the website was developed by F. CMS is really very much like MODX Revolution, and Yes, as a module of the online store used by ShopKeeper Andchir.
In fact, a continuation written in my article was submitted to me the claim "about protection of business reputation and recovery of reputational injury caused by the company OOO "Factory of sites"" 500 000 rubles. It is clear, right? About protection of business reputation.
That is, they pulled someone else's engine, other modules on the best practices, gave them for their rendered services anyhow and then demand "protection of business reputation". At the expense of "hit and miss" — detailed topic with screenshots of their ticketing system, by which everyone can assess how well they work with clients.
The result of this whole story — the Court decided to refuse claim. Justice prevails!
Why I'm writing this on habré? Action Factory sites (and similar companies) violate the interests of the MODX community (probably similar companies in other core areas). They take someone else's intellectual work and give their own, profiting from others ' developments. It would be better for them to give credit, that would be fair. Let's hope that the publicity this incident somehow compensates for this injustice.
UPD: There are people (including a former employee of the Factory) are actively trying topic to translate into "But was it all a violation of the GPL license"? (though I about it did not say). In response, here is an excerpt of the MODX license.
Source: forums.modx.com/index.php/topic,26417.0.html
Plus, I recommend to familiarize with quite similar theme: suhinin.com/2009/12/11/copyright-gnu-gpl
UPD 2: Answers to comments concerning licenses and violations stop here. Let everyone remain with his opinion. There will be some serious documentary shifts — separately unsubscribe.
UPD 3: despite the fact that some here have tried to prove that the GPL permits almost all, there is precedent for winning in court cases to protect opensource project. habrahabr.ru/post/257149/#comment_8405951
UPD 4: Rezolucija.
UPD 5: the Refusal on appeal.
Article based on information from habrahabr.ru
Last year I had to face a couple of clients whose websites are long and hopelessly was developed in the Factory. One of the sites was redesigned and the results were written a detailed topic, where I judged the quality of the work performed by said company. And Yes, I transferred the website was developed by F. CMS is really very much like MODX Revolution, and Yes, as a module of the online store used by ShopKeeper Andchir.
In fact, a continuation written in my article was submitted to me the claim "about protection of business reputation and recovery of reputational injury caused by the company OOO "Factory of sites"" 500 000 rubles. It is clear, right? About protection of business reputation.
That is, they pulled someone else's engine, other modules on the best practices, gave them for their rendered services anyhow and then demand "protection of business reputation". At the expense of "hit and miss" — detailed topic with screenshots of their ticketing system, by which everyone can assess how well they work with clients.
The result of this whole story — the Court decided to refuse claim. Justice prevails!
Why I'm writing this on habré? Action Factory sites (and similar companies) violate the interests of the MODX community (probably similar companies in other core areas). They take someone else's intellectual work and give their own, profiting from others ' developments. It would be better for them to give credit, that would be fair. Let's hope that the publicity this incident somehow compensates for this injustice.
UPD: There are people (including a former employee of the Factory) are actively trying topic to translate into "But was it all a violation of the GPL license"? (though I about it did not say). In response, here is an excerpt of the MODX license.
in Order to eliminate future disagreements and misunderstanding, once and for all now please note:
thethe
- NOBODY HAS the RIGHT to REMOVE OR in ANY WAY MODIFY the LINKS TO DEVELOPERS AND the NAME "MODx" WITHIN the CONTROL SYSTEM, AND IN EXTERNAL FORM (LOGIN, "/manager/").
the- NOBODY HAS the RIGHT to ATTRIBUTE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE UNDER ANY KIND of MANAGEMENT SYSTEM MODx AS its OWN DEVELOPMENT.
the- VIOLATION of THESE CONDITIONS IS a VIOLATION of the COPYRIGHT of the DEVELOPERS AND MAY lead to APPROPRIATE SANCTIONS.
As a confirmation of my words, here is the official answer of developers Ryan Thrash (rthrash) and Jason Coward (OpenGeek) to my query on this topic:
The MODx copyright covers the look and feel parts of MODx, and our implementation of the manager. This is very different than the License which permits free distribution of the software. Our stance is that removal of our copyright and MODx trying to pass off as your own creation is very much not acceptable, and we will offer no support to any individuals that choose to do so, including removing and deleting their users from the forums.
There are tens of thousands of hours from a relatively small group of people that have gone into making MODx what it is today. We simply respectfully request that the "MODx" itself and links to our support resources remains any time it's installed for use on websites.
Source: forums.modx.com/index.php/topic,26417.0.html
Plus, I recommend to familiarize with quite similar theme: suhinin.com/2009/12/11/copyright-gnu-gpl
UPD 2: Answers to comments concerning licenses and violations stop here. Let everyone remain with his opinion. There will be some serious documentary shifts — separately unsubscribe.
UPD 3: despite the fact that some here have tried to prove that the GPL permits almost all, there is precedent for winning in court cases to protect opensource project. habrahabr.ru/post/257149/#comment_8405951
UPD 4: Rezolucija.
UPD 5: the Refusal on appeal.
Комментарии
Отправить комментарий