Mike Soh
Scriptwright
 |
thats my question really. IANAL but I assume the process is similar to the DCMA policy I notify the site and you guys handle it? |
Jefferson Scher
Scriptwright
 |
The GPL is fairly liberal about redistribution. Scripts here are in source form, so maybe it's just a question of proper notices, or incorporation into a script with a compatible license. Can you give an example of noncompliance that might lead the licensor to want a take-down? |
|
Mike Soh
Scriptwright
|
It's a script I wrote. The author copied it without attribution and does not license to a GPL compatible license. I've already contacted the author privately about it so I don't want to make it a public issue just yet. Just wondering what the procedure would be should the author not do anything about it. |
Marti
Scriptwright
 |
Jefferson Scher wrote:This isn't entirely true... once GPL always GPL... this is designed to keep free software free and out of reach from patents and unscrupulous theft from certain (re)authors. Jefferson Scher wrote:Per file is acceptable under MPL 1.1 however direct, single file, derivatives are required to stay GPL regardless of whatever MIT and other "almost" FOSS licenses are applied after it. Mike Soh wrote:Sounds like a good plan... I would also mark in the issues tab of it that it is a derivative and point it to the root script if possible. If the author fails to continue the license under GPLs terms then you may, at your option, contact GPL for further recommendations as well as file a DMCA violation. GPL will probably say contact an attorney but sometimes they don't and pursue it... the DMCA violation will be required to have it removed and the authors identity will be subject to Federal/State/Provincial investigation for breach of Copyright/Licensing. It is customary to give @attribution or related metadata block keys in a user.js although some just put it in a comment inside the script along with a copy of the short form of GPL. |
|
Mike Soh
Scriptwright
|
I'm not looking for money or anything like that. I choose GPL (over, say MIT) because of the copyleft. Derivative scripts must be licensed using a compatible license. Overall, it isn't a big deal and not looking to sue. Just hoping to make the script compliant. If I don't hear back from the author within 30 days (as allowed by the GPL 3.0), I'll go ahead and file a DMCA. |
HAGRID
User
|
NOT NECESSARILY A MATTER IF YOU WANT TO SUE. LITIGATION COULD BE CRIMINAL INSTEAD OF CIVIL, SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO. DMCA IS PROBABLY THE BEST OPTION IN YOUR CASE. |
|
Mike Soh
Scriptwright
|
Well, it's been well over two months since I find the violation and notified the user. The user never replied back so I submitted a DMCA letter to Userscripts. That, too, received no reply. I just mailed a certified letter to Userscripts. I am still hoping to get this resolved without involving lawyers... |
Voices
