Hello,

Unless the matter has been dealt with before (in which case please let me know where to find it), I’d like to start a discussion/ topic dealing with the following (legal/ ethical) issue:

Dotnetnuke:

Copyright
Ownership
Licensing
Usage
(Re)distribution

versus

Third party DNN modules (non-commercial/ commercial):

Copyright
Ownership
Licensing
Usage
(Re)distribution

Where there’s a distinction between [3] different types of modules:

a. adding to/ changing a core DNN module
b. “newly” developed DNN module (always making use of core DNN framework)
[c. hybrids]


Specific Questions

1- what is the effect of the DNN license on any third party derivatives (modules/ add ons etc);

2 - what is the value of any Third party License considering 1. ; what should it be like to have any value/effect (what area’s could/ should it cover); how and where should it be published/ delivered to have any (legal) status (e.g. when zipped along in a PA, how will a user ever find it? or mentioned at some place at the original website?).

3. - when and what part of a “newly” created module can you call “your own” (see moduletypes a. to c.)

4. - what are the rules (legal & ethics) to take into consideration when you collect third party modules that are freely available for download from different websites for further use e.g.

Some possible scenario’s:

a. after collecting the modules, you make them available (for download) through your website to:
1. public visitors and/or
2. registered visitors and/or
3. private visitors

Note: is there a difference between the three?
 
b. the collected modules are made part of a newly construed DNN installation version to be sold (possible under a new name) to customers

c. the collected modules are made part of a regular DNN installation which is installed and implemented (free or at a commercial price) for a client, customer, relative, friend etc. (files are transferred to the new owner)

Note: the payment only covers the service delivered, the files/software is delivered free of charge.

d. clients/ customers can register and setup their own child or parent portal from a basic DNN installation and (freely) make use of all third party modules. They pay a fixed fee per month for the portal use.

e. clients/ customers can register and setup their own child or parent portal from a basic DNN installation and make use of any third party module at a price per extra module. They also pay a fixed fee per month for the portal use.

etc.


Why these questions?

First of all I’m no laywer, so I’m curious to find out about some of the do’s and don’ts in the DNN project.

Second, at Fws Dotnetnukes we’ve been offering up (free third party) modules (and skins and documents and info and links) for download since Dec. 2003.

We’ve never had any complaints and mean to be (and have been ) of service to the community (consider how much time went into collecting and testing and fixing all these modules and what is saves to others; to developers it has been a great way to collect a bunch of sample source code in one go). Part of the idea to collect and make them availabe (as zipped “grab bags”) even originated from a mailmessage from Shaun Walker in 2004.

Due reference has always been made to the source of the modules (this is where you will find the support and knowledge for the specific module, so users will always go there anyway). There are only one or two sites that have come up with some sort of license, however they are quite inconsistant.

In the past few days I’ve suddenly received two mails from people who reject to the fact that “their” modules are there to download. One does have some claims because a license txt file is part of the PA:

“Licence:
You are free to use the module (as an executable) only if you are agree with the following.
- THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND.
- You are not allowed to reverse engineer it by any way or technology.
- You are not allowed to sell it, rent it,etc by other rights than [name]
The only thing requested is to put a reference link to [name]”

Notes:
- free redistribution isn’t mentioned anywhere?
- a license “hidden” in a zipped file PA file?

The other claims it to be unethical or contrary to the culture and nature of the Dotnetnuke project. I beg to differ on this but am willing to hear what others think of this. Basically, unless explicitely told otherwise (license) I consider all (free) DNN products to be part of the main BSD license.

Finally, I think it would benefit the project to make clear what the legal status and ethics are when it comes to the offspring of the DNN project.

Please let know what you think of the above and shed some wisdom and advise. Thanks already.