Just a simple question can I get a skin and add-on into the offical repo using this license?
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
I am starting from scratch on a skin and add-on that is required to make the skin work properly. And am tired of ideas being ripped before release.
So in hopes this will stop some of it.
I don't see why not. Regarding licenses I think the only requirement is that the source is made publicly available.
Whether it will stop people people from making derivatives is another story though. I use a non-commercial CC license but I have had to sent a cease and desist message on numerous occasions because of my skin being used in commercial products.
Maybe it will stop the honest guy... Lol
I haven't made any public release yet if anything because I can can't get through private before seeing stuff pop up on here.. and it is irritating I know I am still learning but so thing I have done no other skin had/has but I few will have in the coming months so it has put a bad taste if u know what I mean.
So I have once again started over this time completly from nothing so no one can say I used there stuff as a base just so I can set the license. Even the add-on is don't this way as a couple things are really tweaked and the skin will depend on the add-on itself.
Just already done with the forum bs... I know it is all public domain but at the same time Skinner to Skinner respect the next guy as before ripping off.
Yeah, in the end we all know we're making add-ons for an open source project. That means we can enjoys the benefits of it but we also have to deal with the downsides, but those are te rules of the game.
I do however understand your sentiments. Apart from licenses and rules, common courtesy and decency should have a place. My previous skin has always been an under the radar type of skin I think, because of several reasons. Yet over the years I have seen many features of which I am certain I was the first to use, pop up in other skins without any attribution ever being made (even though that is part of the license I chose). Attribution is not about bragging rights (not to me at least) but it is about respect and recognition for things you spent a lot of effort on.
I do however luckily encounter the opposite. Folks like braz and jurialmunkey acknowledge other skinner's contributions as much as they contribute to the community themselves. And the private beta I started for my new skin a while back has went on with everyone fully respecting the "rules" I set beforehand.
I'm guessing you have had bad luck in choosing people to trust. Which is unfortunate, but I hope you will not let it discourage you too much. Because in the end what matters most (imo) is enjoying the process of creating something you can be proud of.
Copyright licenses are about telling people what they *can* do with a work, not what they *cannot*. As the creator of a creative work, you automatically have copyright over your work. The copyright holder begins with exclusive rights over use and distribution of that work. The purpose of a license is to *give away* certain rights so that other people can use it in a certain capacity (e.g. so someone would be allowed to distribute it).
You can always change a skin's license to be less restrictive at a later date. YOU own the rights to YOUR work - you always will unless you explicitly sell or give those rights to someone else. You can do a small private release with very restricted rights (I would forgo the CC license altogether and just go with a simple statement that all rights are reserved and the skin should not be redistributed, modified or sold in any form). Then when you want to go on official repo, switch to a CC share-alike non-commercial license.
Personally, I would advise *against* a no derivatives clause in an official release as it is very much against the spirit of the community in general. Such a clause would mean that no one would be allowed to make a mod of your skin. The vast majority of skinners started out making a mod of another skin and then sharing their work on the forums -- an ND clause goes against this spirit. Not only that, but it technically means that no one is even allowed to submit bugfixes as a github PR as the fix would be a derivative work.
You also have to think that, even though your code might be written from scratch, how many existing methods and ideas are you building upon that other skinners have already developed. There are so many little tricks that I have learnt along the way not only from other skins and posting questions in the skinning forum, but also from ideas sparked from user suggestions. Yes there are always going to be greedy self-entitled users. But make sure you are also thinking about the skinning community of which you are a part - it is a bit of an affront to use all the existing knowledge, tricks and various other resources and then tell everyone else that they aren't allowed to use anything that you thought up. Imagine if no-one except BobCratchett or Marcelveldt were allowed to use skinshortcuts or skinhelper...
I understand your frustration. Every skinner does. That's why all the "skilled skinners" are courteous and ask permission and give attribution. We get it because it has happened to all of us before. It sucks that some people lack common courtesy and are over eager to rip off whatever the latest idea is and pass it off as their own. But it cuts both ways - you have to think about the honest courteous people too.
If you are only worried about things being taken before release, the best way to protect yourself is to only release ideas that you are happy for others to use and make sure you carefully select people you trust to do testing. Make it clear to your testers that you are working hard on the skin and you want to have a trusting relationship with them where you can share your ideas and receive feedback from them without those ideas being taken before you are ready to release things. If you are worried about this after release, then I think you might need to have a longer think about why you want to make a publicly available skin.
Wow, that turned into a bit of an essay. Sorry about that
I am getting quite curious now what exactly is being ripped off.
About the license, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 is allowed in the official repo but it won't protect you from people ripping off ideas (either visual or code wise). It is a license that is meant to be shared and built upon for non commercial use. All skins out there are build upon the skins that were there before them (either visual or code wise) and that is exactly why there are so many awesome skins now.
If you absolutely don't want your work to be shared you chose the wrong project to contribute too imo.
Of course presenting other peoples ideas as your own is not done, but that is another story.
What is the addon?
I will add, to 'lazer in' someone else's code, then try and 'protect it' is a bit 'Plex inc.' imho.
Also, just don't release anything. Just put it in the Kodi repo when done, simples.
Thanks all for your replies.
Jeron thank you and you are right it is open source and all of that is understandable and it maybe I am a little egotistical with the whole attribution thing, at the same time generally speaking and because I have been learning but spend six plus months of code every bit of your free time to try to make something not only that I want but it is unique and trying to be different then everyone else, make me feel that way.
And agree I am wrong for that as it is the nature of the best. I am only human.
Jurialmunkey you are right about the pull request I had not thought that far ahead. And yes original start was a mod but as u say u have to learn. And I am greedy until full public release as I already started heart goes into these things as u all know.. but it has been a adventure and I have been learning it is a lot you can do with python. And when I do release the add-on will be documented for use ... And if any of you have read my uni Plex thread you know I am the first to give attribution credit and gratitude, at least I thought I had.
Bignoid you to sir are right in hall honesty none of the license mean anything I guess is what you all have made me see because the code will be there in the end for all and all will use it... And you cannot prove a copy as all is open source and we all are resticted to the same code so it will all be similar.
And last but not least my buddy,
Badaas to start with the original skin was uni "Plex" maybe it had a under lying message. Hahaha.
And yes the add-on will have blur as does the toolbox script. I do match colors completey different then you sir, as this add-on will accommodate my needs. Also the change font color I got you to add I have yet again added a different and better approch now that I have spent some hours going through the pil library and a few others it seems to be working dead on.
There will be more to it as I progress but I know that is what your asking about with the whole Lazer in portion of your comment. And of all people you should know I have given you your credit as I have spoke highly of you and your addon through out the process but there are some things I want to do that you don't want to add and I am tired of changing the skin Everytime you update colorbox.
Now that all that has been said I once again would like to thank you all for answering my question(s).
It has been a fun and interesting experience you all have tough me a lot and for that I am grateful, even with my greedy ways hahaha.
Best wishes to all
So what you seem to be saying is that you are happy to learn from the code of others but not for others to use your ideas.
If people use your ideas then take it as a compliment.
(2017-08-12, 00:13)smitchell6879 Wrote: [ -> ]... sir, as this add-on will accommodate my needs. Also the change font color I got you to add I have yet again added a different and better approch now that I have spent some hours going through the pil library and a few others it seems to be working dead on.
Well, I guess I wasted my time adding what you wanted.
And I guess 'sir' is a thinly veiled dig.
I don't guess you're happy to take the time of others, but not share your time
Enjoy your new toys.
(2017-08-11, 00:54)smitchell6879 Wrote: [ -> ]Just a simple question can I get a skin and add-on into the offical repo using this license?
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
I am starting from scratch on a skin and add-on that is required to make the skin work properly. And am tired of ideas being ripped before release.
So in hopes this will stop some of it.
"Ideas" ripped off before release? I'd be careful... I've given you a dozen "ideas" when you asked for development help. Under your conditions those "ideas" are my intellectual property.
It's alarming that you've spent a better part of the year taxing the forums with skin and development related questions... Yet turn your nose to those community members that provided you the learning blocks required. You've received an abundance of help all while never releasing a single project.
I understand nobody likes uncredited code cloning, but ideas are free to all...
Hmmm...
My opinion ain't worth much but I can understand smitchell6879 feeling ripped off in some way. However, the nature of open source and the community as a whole contradict the notion of "this code is mine"...
At the end of the day your work can be your own but if it uses an amalgamation of the many ideas of others, is it really your own?
I don't think so.
@
smitchell6879 IMHO your wording could have been better. The feelings and opinions expressed by others is more than justifiable based on the things you said
Any form of creativity is always an amalgamation of your own ideas and those of others, even subconsciously. That in itself doesn't have anything to do with licenses, open source, copyright or credits. I certainly do believe one can call something "their" creation, idea or product though.
Look, I'm not an open source evangelist. I'm not against it either. But I don't think it is the solution to everything in software development, and I don't think closed source is bad by definition. Maybe I am "cursing in the church" as they say over here, but i feel there are as many downsides to open source as there are benefits. I do however feel that when you take part in a community of an open source project and use ideas, code, advices and concepts by that community, using a "closed" license is not the way to go. It will certainly make people who helped you before think twice when you ask for help again.
What I can understand though, is that you feel betrayed by people you chose to trust. If you ask people to not share something from a private beta and then they do, then you have a right to be upset and angry about it imo. Whether or not this project is 10% new ideas or 100% is irrelevant.
However, using a non derivatives license on the official repo is not something I understand in these circumstances. After all, at that point you are releasing the skin publicly and there is no "risk" of your ideas being used in other skins before your skin is released.. Which was the entire problem to begin with right?
Quote:Copyrights protect expression and patents protects inventions, and neither protect ideas. In both cases the idea is the first critical step, but without some identifiable embodiment of the idea there can be no intellectual property protection obtained and no exclusive rights will flow unto you.
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2014/02/15/pro.../id=48009/
(2017-08-14, 10:08)nickr Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Copyrights protect expression and patents protects inventions, and neither protect ideas. In both cases the idea is the first critical step, but without some identifiable embodiment of the idea there can be no intellectual property protection obtained and no exclusive rights will flow unto you.
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2014/02/15/pro.../id=48009/
Not meaning to make this bigger than it should be but a skin, or a certain aspect of it, seems like it can be an identifiable embodiment of an idea to me.
From the same article:
Quote:But there must be a way to protect my idea somehow, right? Well, the answer is yes, at least to some extent. As already mentioned in the previous paragraph, if you can get someone to sign a Confidentiality Agreement then they will be promising not to use your idea without your permission and to keep it secret. This is not a form of intellectual property though, and can be various levels of extremely difficult to impossible to achieve.
Let's put things in perspective. Creating skins for Kodi, and even the entire Kodi project is a hobby project. I am saying this without intending to devalue any contributions made to either. So no, skinners will not set up a legal document to ensure people will temporarily keep it under wraps.
So in those circumstances people will go with their instincts and belief in people's intentions and honesty. And the way I see it, that is what is the main issue here. Not copyright law, license agreements or what legally constitutes an idea or invention.
I am not defending OP wanting to use a non-derivative license, but I do think he has the right to feel betrayed and can understand it to a certain extent.