If people are concerned about it, then it should be discussed everywhere. If they would rather ignore it, then it should be taken to some rarely traveled list that nobody is on.
I've said my piece. -Kevin > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:56 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Subject: MM will OWN my Devex Submissions? > > > Shouldn't this stuff be posted on macromedia 'list' at > houseoffusion.com? I believe that's why that list exists...? This isn't > code related (distribution of code, yes, code related, no). > > Just curious, > ~Todd > > At 09:52 AM 3/10/2003 -0600, you wrote: > >I think you're right to be concerned. I remember when Apple did this with > >their online iDisk accounts and Yahoo with their Geocities > accounts. In all > >these cases we can guess that the intent is that they just need > to have the > >right to copy and redistribute the material which is the purpose of the > >DevEx. But the problems arise with the phrases "perpetual", > "irrevocable", > >and "modify". I'll leave "create derivative works" up to the jury here > >though in my opinion it's pretty significant. > > > >A basic tenet of copyright law is that the creator is granted automatic > >copyright. The submission requirements you pointed out appear to do more > >than just grant a limited right to copy to Macromedia for the purposes of > >operating the DevEx. It appears that agreeing to them > constitutes a complete > >signing over of copyright ownership to Macromedia. That means > they can call > >it their own and resell it at a profit without recompensing you. They can > >even integrate it into their own products without recompense. > > > >The question is how much of that is the purpose of the DevEx? We > all use it > >to help our own projects, and MM shouldn't be any different. However, it > >seems to me that MM is in a somewhat unique position by having > the ability > >to integrate submissions into products like Dreamweaver. Is there a > >difference though between keeping the code and ownership intact > and bundling > >it or the alternative of taking the code concepts and creating a > derivative > >work they call their own and make a profit on? > > > >The community persuaded Apple to change their policy. It's up to the > >community to make Macromedia change theirs. I'm not a lawyer, > but I suspect > >a lawyer would tell you to run, not walk, away from the DevEx > based on the > >current terms. > > > >-Kevin > > > > ---------- > Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - http://www.web-rat.com/ > Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion > http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ > http://www.devmx.com/ > > ---------- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
