A lot of modules are out there that are nothing more than the core modules with a little bit of extended functionality.

A lot of skins/containers are out there that are nothing more than the core skins slightly modified.

Most of which are all claimed as a companies "own" creation.

If you want to exhaust your efforts complaining about the morals of some business you have no association with, your free to do so. But you do so at the risk of your financial future as noted previously.

What that company is doing with DNN isn't illegal. What they are doing with the skins could be, but that would be up to the people that created them originally, not you.

There are plenty of web development companies/consultants out there using/selling DNN as there own. I find it quite odd that you come into a public forum and want to single just one out and open yourself up to libel.

My advice to you would be to drop your little e-crusade and focus on your own company. You might even want to market your morality in your next press release and see how far that gets you and your company.

>By the way, these kinds of posts can be damaging to someone's business.  If they can prove that in court, then you >can be held accountable for the damages.  If you went as far as to contact the customers of this business, they would >have no trouble proving it either.

actually now the forum is on Dotnetnuke.com this thread could be quite damaging to the owners of the Dotnetnuke site - I believe that the duscussion would be in breech of the forums terms of use and there fore should be checked before allowing to be posted. By allowing the allegations to be made on the public forum the owners leave themselves open to claims of damage from this company.

I make no suggestion if the statements on the forum are right or wrong but I think it might be a good idea to stop the thread and delete it from public view.= some of the comments are certainly outside the terms of use statement and some of the comments could be taken as Defamatory since I assume those making the comments and those publishing the comments may have not viewed the actual code that this company puts out to see if the copyright notice is actually in place.

The situation with copyright is simple you must place the notice within the source code no matter if you have done heavy modifications or not. The use of the term DotNetNuke as the decriptor of the product you market or give away can only be used if no 'major' modifications have been done to the core code. in the policy 'major' and 'changes' are not defined however if one has done major changes then one would not really want to sell it as DotNetNuke anyway.

.