Okay, a bit of an update. He knows I was talking about him. Hell, he went to an extent to create another account on my site here, why, not sure. No real reason to have a second account and use both of them. (Your IP gave you away).

Let's address the comments he made in his post on his site. Okay, some points were brought up in a rant of his where were a bit false and as he said, if you're going to claim something, do a bit of homework. (Using your own words here).

First comment before the insults starts directed towards, (well I am betting, me), is stating, and I am going to paraphrase a bit, (if you modify anything, its no longer the original authors.). Well, if you have been around as long as you claim, then you know right there you are full of it. You can not take a persons work, change 1 word and say it's yours. The GNU does not cover that, and under US copyright law, is illegal. Now, before I get into which law it is, and I will get you that in 1 sec, I know you are going to argue, by just putting a © next to your domain at the bottom of the script, or within the top of the code doesn't make it a legal copyright, that is where you are wrong.

Even if you don’t put that little © on your work, you automatically get copyright protection the instant your work of expression becomes fixed in a tangible medium. Theoretically, this means that you own the copyright, and no one may copy, distribute, display or make adaptations of the work without your permission. Now, would it hold up in court, that is where it will be iffy. It would have to be up to the one that you infringed upon to file a lawsuit and would need to convince the judge to order the other party to stop the infringement and possibly pay a compensation for any losses if, said item was a sellable item.

Now, some people may say, "well that is only for tangible medium, well script aren't a tangible medium.", well, if you think this, you would be wrong.

Regardless of whether or not you can touch the copyrighted work, if it is stored in some permanent (or even semi-permanent) medium that enables copying, accessing or transmission of the work by others, it is considered to be fixed into a tangible medium.

This means that the law that was written for books and tapes just as easily applies to the internet and computers. After all, saving a work to a hard drive (either your own or one in the cloud) clearly meets these standards for tangibility.

That, in turn, is one of the really good things about The Copyright Act of 1976, it was written to be technology neutral. This means that the act is able to function more than 40 years after it was written and after what is quite possibly the biggest technological revolution in history.

Source:

Please login to see this link Get registered or Log in

Next part you say if you don't sign your full legal name to your work, then it's not copyrighted, and, again, this is not fully correct. If you are the developer and go spend around $55 to file the copyright for each script, then, yes, you would need to use your full legal name, and no matter what, the courts would side with you unless you are the one that stole and tried copyrighting it your self fraudulently, which it looks like you can be fined no more than $2,500.

Source:

Please login to see this link Get registered or Log in

(d) Fraudulent Removal of Copyright Notice.—Any person who, with fraudulent intent, removes or alters any notice of copyright appearing on a copy of a copyrighted work shall be fined not more than $2,500.

(e) False Representation.—Any person who knowingly makes a false representation of a material fact in the application for copyright registration provided for by section 409, or in any written statement filed in connection with the application, shall be fined not more than $2,500.

Even under the GNU, it states:

Under the Berne Convention, everything written is automatically copyrighted from whenever it is put in fixed form. So you don't have to do anything to “get” the copyright on what you write—as long as nobody else can claim to own your work.

Source:

Please login to see this link Get registered or Log in

So, in a sense, under the GNU, it forces those copyright laws to be upheld, well, depending on what country your in. Copyrighting it under your legal name, you only need to do that when you file for the copyright if you decide to. Otherwise, you can still copyright to your site/nick, for once it's a tangible item, you are automatically covered by the copyright laws. Yes, you can even go further and copyright your site, which, if you do this, it will last the lifetime of the person that copyrighted it, and it's content, (Original content only), +70 years. Now, that will provide you with more options and protection, but, most sites, if they do go this route, they only copyright certain areas of their site and not their whole site due to things like forums, blocks, posts, images, ect... being added that they do not own the rights to.

Now, lets talk about more of the GNU and what you said about it. I'm adding in paraphrased statements of his for those that didn't read his post, so they know what I am talking about. You said under the GNU, it allows you to modify the files, and I agree, yes, you can modify a system, (I never said you couldn't). You mention that you can sell the system if you wanted to, I agree, yes, you can sell the system if you wanted on your site, (I never even mentioned that, so I don't know why you brought it up. I guess you just needed more to prove nothing.). However, nowhere in the GNU, version 2 or version 3 does it say, you change one line, it's automatically yours. Nowhere in the GNU does it allow you to remove one's copyrights and substitute it as your own, in actuality, it's quite opposite.

There was once a discussion on this over on RavenNuke site, maybe it was ClanThemes, anyway, it was many years ago, probably around 2006, where it was brought up, what constitutes enough of the coding that has to be change before you can claim it as new work, and since there is NO defined amount, consensus was about 85% if I remember right. But, it was also determined that no matter what, it wasn't a good idea or good practice to remove the previous credits and replace them with your own, or claim the system was rewritten, (when it wasn't), by you.

Now, I did notice that you updated your original post that prompted this thread. I see that it now shows where all the scripts are modified from, which did actually break GNU. Section 5, part a, at first:

Please login to see this link Get registered or Log in

The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.

And subsequently,
section 7, part b,

[you may require] ... preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal Notices displayed by works containing it

Overall, putting it on your site and not redistributing it is 100% fine, but, if you're trying to redistribute it with the copyrights removed, well, that's not allowed if you want to be technical by copyright and GNU.

What it comes down to, you talk a lot about being around for a long time, having so much work done, being part of this community, yet, can we see one of these such scripts that you wrote from the ground up, using modern coding? Everything I have seen from you is simple stuff, and all edits of other peoples work. Some of that stuff I did 10+ years ago when I was still with ClanThemes, so I know how it's done and what is needed to integrate things like Facebook. Do I think it's bad to modify or upgrade others work, absolutely not, but, taking credit for it, that is a problem.

What you're trying to accomplish with your site, that's fine, I never once said it was bad for someone to do what you're trying to accomplish, what I am calling out is the manner that you are doing it and if you have been around for as long as you claim you have been, you would know this to be true as well. RavenNuke, PHPNUKE, Evo, and other communities alike, all operated under basically everything that I have claimed, and you should know this.

I also can tell that I struck a nerve because in my post, I have not insulted you once, yet your post, well, you know, I don't even need to say. For someone that says they are old enough to be my grandfather, you sure aren't showing the level of maturity that would go along with that. I also am citing copyright laws and GNU disproving your whole argument, maybe you should take your own advice since you just cited opinions, and shared no references.

Threatening is a low that you shouldn't go to, but you did. And even in that, it has some issues. First, suing anyone, well, that happens every day, even for the most mundane thing. You also don't decide if you're going to win, the judge does. Now, one major issue that would be a factor that goes against that plan is that said person may have had this domain for a decade, so, proving that it was maliciously done infringing on your trademark would be difficult to do since your trademark would be new, and the domain, well, is established. Next, posting said threats on your site and me grabbing full screen captures in PDF format, well, that would also not benefit the lawsuit. Overall, it's not worth it, and I am sure any lawyer would tell you the same. Just drop it, for I still have not gone public with it and only you, me, and Lonestar know what parties are involved, and until you can cite the laws that validate what you claim, it will remain what I just proved, with sources.

[ EDIT ] - Since they decided to go public over on the Evo Xite, the cats out of the bag, so to say. The comment I am responding to is in this PDF. I am not going to link to this guys site for I still don't want to advertise or promote traffic to his site.

Please login to see this link Get registered or Log in

What I find amusing about that dude is how he was (when I first ran into that site over there, not sure if he changed it since) appearing to owning/rights to nukescripts/nukesentinel which Bob Marion turned over to Raven in what 2011?

If anyone wants to mod/change/fork whatever that is released under GPL they have the right to do just that and they have every right to release the changes they made. stripping the previous copyrights however is not ok.

I been trying to hack around nukesentinel and nuke/evo in general to add IPv6 capability. (actually need to get back working on it) but I sure as hell wouldn't be trying to claim I wrote the entire thing like he is over there. I could care less if I was credited for it if I do manage to get it to work 100% its just something I see as a problem and should have been done a decade ago.

You and lonestar are in the right on all this.

— dirtdog wrote

What I find amusing about that dude is how he was (when I first ran into that site over there, not sure if he changed it since) appearing to owning/rights to nukescripts/nukesentinel which Bob Marion turned over to Raven in what 2011?

I do remember them doing this. I really don't know what's with them.
Really, they should just look at the facts and just undo what they did and just take the loss, it sometimes hurts, but when you're in the wrong, no point in making it worse by digging the hole deeper. Screaming louder and stomping feet don't change the facts.

— coRpSE wrote

— dirtdog wrote

What I find amusing about that dude is how he was (when I first ran into that site over there, not sure if he changed it since) appearing to owning/rights to nukescripts/nukesentinel which Bob Marion turned over to Raven in what 2011?

I do remember them doing this. I really don't know what's with them.
Really, they should just look at the facts and just undo what they did and just take the loss, it sometimes hurts, but when you're in the wrong, no point in making it worse by digging the hole deeper. Screaming louder and stomping feet don't change the facts.

sadly some are incapable of admitting they are wrong and just keep doubling down.

I am not sure you remember coRpSE but even before we both started working on Xtreme, This kind of thing, People coming in and stirring the shit pot, happens 2 - 3 times a year, and almost always involves Josh AKA Bayler comes around interfering in matters that don't concern them, Bayler made it quite clear.

If we collaborated with him on a new version of xtreme, He wanted it licensed and encrypted, This was to prevent people stealing other works, Which as you can see his supposed cousin seems to be fine with, He has no principles when it comes to other peoples work, tbh I am quite sick of having to deal with these idiots, It is shit like this that makes me want to walk away and just concentrate on WordPress, But then I remember the handful of people that like to still use Nuke, as some of the new CMS/platforms out there can be quite intimidating to some people, This is why I stick around, and coding is something I have always enjoyed doing, My coding evolves every few months, I am sure coRpSE can attest to this fact lol.

Anyway I am done talking to these idiots, When they are finished their rant, the posts will be moved to a new forum, locked and kept for future reference.

Even after all their crap they spout they have still yet to supply any links/images to show this new super CMS they call EE, The only EE CMS I have heard of and looked at is "Expression Engine" but this is not Bayler/Josh.

I remember. When I was still with Clan Themes, I remember Killigan, (I think it was), annoyed and set a private spot for Bayler. I personally never got involved with anything except with what was going on ClanThemes, since that is where I did all my support. But that is where I met Bayler, and he got me to use Evo. At the time I met him, I had just switched my site from PhpNuke to RavenNuke after my site got hack through vWar module. My biggest grip with RavenNuke was how slow it was to move blocks and what not around. They refused to upgrade their site to use Ajax/jQuery and felt, by doing that, would just ruin the integrity of the CMS.

Overall, I do agree with a lot of what he says on the fact to only real way to protect the source is to encrypt, but, there's a problem with that. You do that, it is no longer OS, now is it. Without almost a full rewrite of the whole system, or without direct permissions from the original authors, I believe that would be breaking the laws, even though I doubt those original authors involved would do anything or really care. But, I am not one to also run around my town jaywalking everywhere for eventually, you may just find one pissed off cop having a bad day, (Yes, I have found that cop before.).

Ah, so many stories, not enough time to post them. Also, I don't think someone would really want to read a book on it. I do have some real doozies of "Stupid Shit, people have done", when installing something, like a module, block, mod, the CMS, or a theme. Just a ton of head scratchers trying to figure out if they followed the instructions, how did they get where they are now. There were a few I became friends with where I banned them from doing any more mods to their site and if they wanted anything, just ask me and I would do it. Yes, they were that bad.

— Lonestar wrote

It is shit like this that makes me want to walk away and just concentrate on WordPress, But then I remember the handful of people that like to still use Nuke, as some of the new CMS/platforms out there can be quite intimidating to some people, This is why I stick around, and coding is something I have always enjoyed doing, My coding evolves every few months, I am sure coRpSE can attest to this fact lol.

Lonestar, I know it is tough but please don't walk away. And I am pretty sure you won't because of this. I, myself, have looked (using it on two of my subsites) into WordPress and am using it as user. For someone who is knowledgeable in HTML and some coding. I, myself, am even feels intimated and confused.

— coRpSE wrote

Overall, I do agree with a lot of what he says on the fact to only real way to protect the source is to encrypt, but, there's a problem with that.

If I remembered it right, I think there is a way to protect without having to encrypt. I don't remember where I saw that from, it had been a long while since I saw it. But I am not sure.

I love how every time I get into a debate over the legality of changing the copyrights and what not, every time I ask for proof, all they do is give me a link to the GNU terms, but, can't specify any part, section, or subsection of the GNU or copyright that backs up their claims, and when I post my links, with sections and subsections, the conversation ends. Please, if you're going to say you in your rights, and let me say it in a way that seems these people can only understand, prove it or shut the fuck up.  I can prove my end of the debate, which is on fact, and thus far, yours is only base on opinion and ignorance.

— EmeraldDragon wrote

If I remembered it right, I think there is a way to protect without having to encrypt. I don't remember where I saw that from, it had been a long while since I saw it. But I am not sure.

The only way I know of is using something like ioncube, which is an encryption software. I used them a while ago when I made the ShadowGate mod. If there is another way, I love to learn about it, because I really do not want to pay the price of ioncube if I don't have to of if there is a better alternative.

— coRpSE wrote

The only way I know of is using something like ioncube, which is an encryption software. I used them a while ago when I made the ShadowGate mod. If there is another way, I love to learn about it, because I really do not want to pay the price of ioncube if I don't have to of if there is a better alternative.

True to that..   If I ever run across it again, and it's FREE I'll be sure to send it your way.