Some clarification needed about use of DXscripts.
Thursday, March 3, 2005 by pjpowell | Discussion: DesktopX
I would like some clarification about fair use of dxscripts. I have recently noticed several objects which have the code from other authors objects/widgets in them. There is no credit given to the original author in many of these cases. Is this considered OK? Should it be classed as ripping? Can I (as the author of the scripts and should I choose to) request the removal of any of them using my code without permission?
I personally have no objection to people using my scripts providing it is with my permission and they mention it explicitly in any uploads. This is mainly so I am aware of who is using what and who will need to be informed should I then later update the scripts/find a bug. It's also partially because like any skinner I like to know that people find my stuff useful.
I design the skins in a way that the code can just be lifted and reused easily intentionally but I like to know that people are doing so. I would also like to categorically say that if my code is used in any gadgets without my express permission I will request from stardock that they are removed.
I personally have no objection to people using my scripts providing it is with my permission and they mention it explicitly in any uploads. This is mainly so I am aware of who is using what and who will need to be informed should I then later update the scripts/find a bug. It's also partially because like any skinner I like to know that people find my stuff useful.
I design the skins in a way that the code can just be lifted and reused easily intentionally but I like to know that people are doing so. I would also like to categorically say that if my code is used in any gadgets without my express permission I will request from stardock that they are removed.
Woodbridge
Reply #2 Thursday, March 3, 2005 8:04 AM
Reply #2 Thursday, March 3, 2005 8:04 AM
I know Stardock/_Martin_ said that we are free to reuse their scripts in our own objects, plus for certain objects there aren't exactly many ways of doing something.
Although saying that my knowledge of VB scripting/DX scripting is soley from looking at other peoples DesktopX scripts (probably a really bad way of learning it...) so perhaps that why I think there is only one or two ways of doing things..
Although saying that my knowledge of VB scripting/DX scripting is soley from looking at other peoples DesktopX scripts (probably a really bad way of learning it...) so perhaps that why I think there is only one or two ways of doing things..
Kevin_C
Reply #3 Thursday, March 3, 2005 8:13 AM
Reply #3 Thursday, March 3, 2005 8:13 AM
Seeing as the code is readily available to anyone who uses the object there isn't much one can do to prevent this from happening. It really comes down to whether or not the person creating the derivative work is thoughtful enough to ask permission before using your code. Of course, if you felt the need to make it less fun to steal your code you could release your widgets with obfuscated script code. It won't stop people from getting the code but it will make it much more difficult for them to extract the portions they want. It's really too bad things like that have to be done, but in a world where people think no one is allowed to have exclusive rights to anyting there will always be someone out there who makes it their goal to steal from someone else.
pjpowell
Reply #4 Thursday, March 3, 2005 8:52 AM
Reply #4 Thursday, March 3, 2005 8:52 AM
f0r3: The images are also readily available to anyone who uses it but there would be a great outcry if they were used in other peoples themes/objects without permission. The goal of this was more to make sure scripters get the same recognition as the artists from those re-using scripts who may not even realise that it's the same premise.
Obfuscating the script code would make no difference. People haven't even modified the scripts or object names in many cases. They have no idea how the script works and don't care. All they do is download a widget/object and change the images/fonts of the objects. The functionality is the same with a new look.
Obfuscating the script code would make no difference. People haven't even modified the scripts or object names in many cases. They have no idea how the script works and don't care. All they do is download a widget/object and change the images/fonts of the objects. The functionality is the same with a new look.
Woodbridge
Reply #5 Thursday, March 3, 2005 9:07 AM
Reply #5 Thursday, March 3, 2005 9:07 AM
Maybe Stardock could add a similar popup box to the DX3 Developer that is in SkinStudio. Whenever someone imports a widget a little msg pops up saying something the author has written like "This widget is written by X, if you want to modifiy and redistribute then you need to seek permision" etc.
Kevin_C
Reply #6 Thursday, March 3, 2005 1:57 PM
Reply #6 Thursday, March 3, 2005 1:57 PM
pjpowell, I'm not arguing your point at all! In fact, I agree with you whole heartedly. My point was simply that there's probably little that can or will be done to protect DX scripts, so if you're looking to discourage these actions all you can do is make the persons life more difficult. Now, if things are as you say where people simple steal the widget flat out and change graphics and fonts then I don't see what can be done. I'm not even sure there's anything that SD can do about that type of action. I mean, I don't want to completely lost the ability to access the widgets code because I like to look at some widgets just to see how certain things are done, but I've never stolen someone else's script and claimed it as my own.
It ouwld be cool if there was an object created that held some sort of security properties that are created when the object is first created that would allow authors to set accessibility options on the scripts and abjects. Kind of like file attributes. It could allow properties like names, images, fonts etc to be set to readonly, you could set scripts as read-only so users could look at the code but they wouldn't be able to copy it or make any changes unless you authorized it.. Granted, it would be a fair bit of work for the SD developers for what might not amount to much in their eyes, but it would be cool!
It ouwld be cool if there was an object created that held some sort of security properties that are created when the object is first created that would allow authors to set accessibility options on the scripts and abjects. Kind of like file attributes. It could allow properties like names, images, fonts etc to be set to readonly, you could set scripts as read-only so users could look at the code but they wouldn't be able to copy it or make any changes unless you authorized it.. Granted, it would be a fair bit of work for the SD developers for what might not amount to much in their eyes, but it would be cool!
Thomas Thomassen
Reply #7 Thursday, March 3, 2005 5:00 PM
Reply #7 Thursday, March 3, 2005 5:00 PM
I'd say using someones sourcecode is the same as using someones images. It's all something someone has put work and effort into and should be credited accordingly. And I'm pretty sure the copyright law applies here as well.
Frogboy
Reply #14 Sunday, March 6, 2005 4:54 PM
Reply #14 Sunday, March 6, 2005 4:54 PM
I would suggest that authors who don't want to share their code put a notice at the top of their script saying that permission must be sought.
I treat my code as essentially open-source. Anyone is free to use it.
pjpowell
Reply #15 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:50 PM
Reply #15 Sunday, March 6, 2005 7:50 PM
MJM: I tried your widget but it won't run at all for me. Just complains it's being imported (and it isn't) and then puts an error icon in the systray. DXWidget then crashes some seconds later.
However I did get to see the code and it's quite an interesting idea and gives me an idea of another way to do a similar thing.
However I did get to see the code and it's quite an interesting idea and gives me an idea of another way to do a similar thing.
M.J.M.
Reply #16 Monday, March 7, 2005 7:09 AM
Reply #16 Monday, March 7, 2005 7:09 AM
I dont know why it crashes but I will test it on other computers and try to fix it.
M.J.M.
Reply #17 Tuesday, March 8, 2005 4:58 AM
Reply #17 Tuesday, March 8, 2005 4:58 AM
pjpowell, can you help me solve this problem? Please check this script on your machine on a widget:
widget.Autorun = True
wa1 = widget.Autorun
widget.Autorun = False
wa2 = widget.Autorun
res = msgbox(wa1&" "&wa2)
I need to know if the problem is with variables (maybe its becouse I didnt declared them) or somting is wrong with widget.autorun
widget.Autorun = True
wa1 = widget.Autorun
widget.Autorun = False
wa2 = widget.Autorun
res = msgbox(wa1&" "&wa2)
I need to know if the problem is with variables (maybe its becouse I didnt declared them) or somting is wrong with widget.autorun
pjpowell
Reply #18 Wednesday, March 9, 2005 4:08 PM
Reply #18 Wednesday, March 9, 2005 4:08 PM
I get True False as expected. But only if it's a widget. If run as an object it gets False False (as I would expect as it's not a widget).
M.J.M.
Reply #19 Wednesday, March 9, 2005 5:43 PM
Reply #19 Wednesday, March 9, 2005 5:43 PM
Thanx. But still Im very puzzled, it should work the same in my MJM_RUN.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Thursday, March 3, 2005 6:35 AM