Polls inside thread posts [Archive] - vBulletin Community Forum

Martin

Thu 27th Apr '00, 3:36pm

Martin, do you think vBulletin's look and feel is a direct rip off of the UBB? I'm just curious. Do you think that the pricing model vBulletin developed is a direct rip off of the UBB? Again, I'm just curious.

I think that vBulletin was built to fill a hole that infopop left when they mislead everyone who had been asking for a database back-end into believing it was coming and then coming up with that unfeatured POS, OpenTopic.
Since it was developed to attract that base clientelle, the look and feel has to be pretty close because (if you run any size board at all you will know this) the end users are resistant to change and want something they can feel comfortable with. Plus, the set up of UBB is very comfortable, so why not use it?
The price is actually LESS than that charged by UBB, though the pricing model is the same.
If you're trying to take customers away from someone, give them something they are used to.

Again, I'm just curious. Finally, Martin, do you think the polls vBulletin will introduce in August will look and feel just like opentopic? do you see a trend, or am I just really dense. I only wish that ezboard and vbulletin think on their own...that's all.

I think that the polls on OpenTopic look almost excactly like the ones on Delphi. I see infopop incorporating features that have existed on other boards for months (sometimes years) into the still-less-than-full-featured OpenTopic. Do *you* see a trend?

Now, for thinking on your own...

Here you can jump to the last post in a topic without a hack, either while posting or from the main page. Does UBB offer that?
Here you can adjust your time zone so posts show in your local time instead of server time. Does UBB offer that?
Here you can change the layout of your boards in an easy template. Does UBB offer that?
Here all your username variable are stored in one, easy to use place. Does UBB offer that?

There are a *lot* of similarities in function and form, but there are a lot of differences, too, so I would have to say that, yes, you are dense.

And I wish that infopop wouldn't mislead their customers and keep up with the times.

WebStyles

Thu 27th Apr '00, 3:39pm

I really didn't realize this before, but OpenTopic's hosting model really reminds me of EZBoard... I'm definitely noticing a trend too... :o

Martin

Thu 27th Apr '00, 3:41pm

I forgot something...

Here you can preview a post. Does UBB or OpenTopic offer that?

werehere

Thu 27th Apr '00, 3:43pm

How about a private forum that is actually private!;)

I see no reason to stick up for Infopop, they are taking my money and not offering a clean current product anymore.

Menno

Thu 27th Apr '00, 4:18pm

Besides, vB is what? a couple of weeks old? look at ubb, it's been here for years. vB is already a better product, who knows what it will have/look like in the future?

Parker Clack

Thu 27th Apr '00, 10:43pm

take5:

I have used UBB for the last 2 years and believe me the majority of their so called innovations are from hackers to their board that have been incorporated into it. Basically all that UBB offered was a clean look with a flat layout instead of a threaded one.

Then on top of this UBB told all of us that they were going to be offering a UBB that had a database backend and to just hold on and then they come out with Open Topic. What's this all about?

What the authors of V Bulletin have done is to offer a product that all of us asked Ted to write for us. He promised he would and then broke that promise to all of us.

I am thrilled that finally someone has taken the time to come out with a quality product that can be realistically used on a site with a large membership base and thousands of messages posted daily and not choke out a dedicated server.

If Infopop had come out with a product that we had all been asking for in the first place this product wouldn't have ever been needed to be written.

I thank God that someone finally did it and in a quality manner.

Parker

Craig A

Fri 28th Apr '00, 8:37pm

Originally posted by take5
I think you guys are stealing too much from Infopop. Isn't this illegal? Steal the attachment feature, steal the poll feature...are you actually going to try to create something of your own? I think Infopop should get a patent on what they are doing because what you are doing is bad business. I'm sticking with them because I know they are the real innovators.

When Ted created UBB he took the defacto forum setup at that time and stood it on it's head - it became so popular that it then became the defacto choice. Sadly, they then seemd to rest on their laurels and failed to continue developing their product (plenty of releases - bug fixes, etc. mainly)

Then, in a similar manner to Ted, along comes vBulletin - which, despite being on it's first release, is already a far superior system than UBB. And if you think that they're not introducing new ideas into this system, you must be blind - take a look around, will ya ?! As I have said on their forums, I genuinely hope that Ted's business flourishes, and UBB goes on to rival vBulletin in the future - competition drives development, and that will benefit us all...

Menno

Fri 28th Apr '00, 10:06pm

Infopop doesn't listen to the ubb users when they request a new feature. They just bring on the milions of bug fixes.
With vBulletin however, just look at how well John/James are listening to all the advices, implementing most, and taking the others under consideration.
You don't see that happening with the ubb.
And yes, vB is already fastly superior to the ubb, and it's a new product. It's mostly up to the users to think up new innovations and functions. This is the way a product should be made.
So vB can become one kickass BB system :)

Richard Tafoya

Sat 29th Apr '00, 8:51am

I'm here for many of the same reasons as the other UBB ex-patriots. I run a board (talk.livedaily.com) with over 10,000 registered members which generates 2-5,000 new posts a day.

If vBulletin had private messages (and by the way, I hope there's a tool to sweep in existing PM settings and messages when PMs do launch for vBulletin), I'd be converting now.

OpenTopic may serve Infopop in terms of attracting venture capital and helping ISP-inhibited users, but the messaging needs of larger businesses require the kind of thinking and development demonstrated by the vBulletin team.

I'm hanging on to my UBB until PM's arrive, but I fully expect the August vBulletin release to leave my current UBB in the dust, and after seeing what it's got, I expect I'll probably do the same.

cheeky

Sat 29th Apr '00, 10:06am

tittle tattle!

The truth is that you guys know exactly who's who, who's copying from whom and where the "original" ideas are coming from.

There will always be leaders and those that follow, but it's the leaders that will lead because they're always one step ahead.

I'm not going to get into a long winded debate about "clean code", it's "bs". I've already done a trial on non-techy internet people regarding the "main boards of discussion and comparison" in terms of

content
style
design
layout
etc...

the results? (as though you'd couldn't guess)

from a laymans point of view, they struggled to tell the difference!
now, in my book - isn't that technically termed "passing off" ?

and does anyone really care anyway?

competition is good, as has been mentioned already, to create more features, lower pricing, better support and documentation, which in turn leads to happy users/moderators.

There's no denying that it's hard to differentiate between similar products - they will inevitable be very close, but there's no excuse for same templates, layout, style etc

is there?

now obviously once the core engine is built with supporting systems, there's no reason why any project should not diversify and stand apart. Only time will tell, if any of the systems achieves this, or whether we just end up with re-engineered software.

Martin

Sat 29th Apr '00, 10:28am

Originally posted by cheeky
...now obviously once the core engine is built with supporting systems, there's no reason why any project should not diversify and stand apart. Only time will tell, if any of the systems achieves this, or whether we just end up with re-engineered software.

So, by following this line of reasoning, when Cadillac introduced the electric starter and interchangable body parts (both of which won them top honors in Britain) they weren't giving us something new, just re-engineering the Model T?

There's a very simple thing that is different here. The core of this software uses PHP and mySQL. That, in and of itself, makes it something other than a re-engineered UBB. The looks are just cosmetic.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 9:33am

Thank you for completely avoiding most of my points.
The point of clean code does not avoid any possible future legal disuptes.

The question is:

If vB were issued a summons for breach of copyright where there is obviously great evidence of "cut & pasting" from external licensed & protected sources, would you re-mortgage your House to defend and support vB if it really came down to it. ????

think about how the Judge / Magistrates would view the situation under the influence of a strong Prosecutor and their ignorance of PHP and back-end database which basically means very little when it is the product and the sum parts that make it. Your argument is for only one part.

It probably will never happen from InfoPop
(at this point in time they are the main party to be concerned with)
but it is a very line that is being drawn here, otherwise why do so many questions would keep getting asked on this issue?

I know that a financial secure operation could easily blow small-time development like this out of the water on legal costs alone, leaving a lot of very unhappy paid up subscribers. Be very wary.

When & if UBB dies or fails to generate significant new versions, where will the innovation for vB come from next ?

Really, any response for anything to do legally speaking concerning possible breaches of copyright or passing of of product, name or service should come directly from the developers and not from the subscribers.

That would be the professional approach.

Really, we should stop asking and mesing around with this issue and get a clear statement from the developers regarding EVERY PART of the licensed commercial software, so that there is no confusing about the origin of said parts.

WebStyles

Fri 26th May '00, 9:50am

Cheeky,

If vB were issued a summons for breach of copyright where there is obviously great evidence of "cut & pasting" from external licensed & protected sources, would you re-mortgage your House to defend and support vB if it really came down to it. ????

The two systems are totally different. I have the code for both systems sitting on my hard drive, and I can tell you that there is nothing similar. Do you even have both systems to compare?

The only reason there is confusion, is because a lot of people neglect to look further than the fact that it "looks like UBB", not even to the point that it's template driven!

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 10:17am

maybe you should pay closer attention to the FAQ sections before you start quoting me and understand the point being made. You guys/gals continue to make the same mistake of the scripting language.

You miss the legal point which is being made here and that is the source of original copyright.

lets take a hypothetical situation for the sake of argument.

1) Party A has some really cool open source content that renders a particular result
2) Party B produces identical results but the with different code.

The rendered results from both parties have a high degree of relevancy and functionality and this pattern/trend continues throughout development of both products, though one falling behind the development of the other. Assuming a reasonble probability it would be fair to assume that the orininal open source copyrighted code from Party A was indeed being copied by Party B, enhanced, reproduced and repackaged under another brand, competing in the same market place. I think you will find that under this limited example that the decision would favour Party A.

You state that vB uses templates and that definition would fall under the enhanced terminology.

Again, I will re-iterate that unless you have the technical legal knowledge and supporting cases of such arbitrations that you be wary of what constitutes a breach of copyright and this matter is really one for the developers to answer.

Mafukie

Fri 26th May '00, 10:31am

this is starting to look like a UBB thread but without moderators asking people to go away or peoples account being deleted :)

I just got done readig the posts on UBB forum and I'm amazed by how childish the Admins and moderators are acting over competition.

Ted must have made millions from UBB after that I woulda just made the product free and retired lol...

John/James

I really hope you guys don't let money go to your heads and keep the price where it is now or :) lower :) it in the future.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 10:56am

All Credit for accounts not being deleted, though that is really never a deterrant from a point being made.
The only real deterrant is the fact of prosecution from malicious activities or abuse of membership etc

Generally speaking, accounts are deleted when there has been a conflict of interest or deception from either party.

I haven't read the posts at uBB but with my business head on for a minute, any competition warrants appropriate professional actions.

The very fact that this sort of development can attract a large user/subscriber base and therefore large sums of capital only re-affirms the concerns over 'similar' products as discussed in my previous post and the legal implications that can arise out of it. As more money is introduced into the marketplace, attitudes will inevitably change for those at the heart of it.

Remember that ultimately you have no control over the product, and I would urge that in order to prevent a similar repeat of history as with uBB that vB issues fixed priced guarantees for medium to long-term periods for the payment and use of said software. It is common practice in any business to offer attractive short-term deals to entice the customer. Once you have them...you have them!

this would make every one happy in case of any posible clauses & future price increase or lack of product support.

WebStyles

Fri 26th May '00, 11:06am

The rendered results from both parties have a high degree of relevancy and functionality and this pattern/trend continues throughout development of both products, though one falling behind the development of the other. Assuming a reasonble probability it would be fair to assume that the orininal open source copyrighted code from Party A was indeed being copied by Party B, enhanced, reproduced and repackaged under another brand, competing in the same market place. I think you will find that under this limited example that the decision would favour Party A.

You're wrong. Take Adobe / Macromedia for instance...

Adobe Illustrator / Macromedia Freehand --> I guess one of them is going down.

Adobe Photoshop / Macromedia Fireworks --> I can't believe they did it twice!

Adobe LiveMotion / Macromedia Flash --> Now this one's really got me up in arms!

If what you are saying were true, realistically, there would only be one piece of software for each function you need to perform on a computer... And the US government calls that a monopoly. ;)

I'd be really interested in your legal sources.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 11:34am

Again, the point is that the issue is one with the respective developers and what if any action they wish to take against the other.

I don't represent infopop, or really give 2 hoots as it's not my stuff being copied, but would be different otherwise, as it would you if the tables were turned.

You mention similar products that render similar results, but in the example I mentioned (which we know what we're talking about here) there is considerably more evidence/similarity supporting the fact that there has been a direct infringement of source materials and very little unique development to conceal that. Also, there has been very little evidence to support a divergence of product.

The professional response, as I indicated earlier, HAS TO COME from the developer, as they only know the real source of materials and any one else would simply be speculating.

The chances are that any action won't be taken and everyone will be okay.
I don't know how "Party A" operate or feel.

But and this is a big BUT...
having worked for both Sony & Virgin for 10 years developing leading computer software, design, graphics, I have experienced cases of copyrighted materials being reproduced and appropriate actions being taken by said Publishers.

Both Sony & Virgin have made successful claims, against abuse of copyrighted source being reproduced for commercial profit.

why do you think such licenses and agreements exist?

WebStyles

Fri 26th May '00, 1:42pm

Originally posted by cheeky
You mention similar products that render similar results, but in the example I mentioned (which we know what we're talking about here) there is considerably more evidence/similarity supporting the fact that there has been a direct infringement of source materials and very little unique development to conceal that. Also, there has been very little evidence to support a divergence of product.

Do you have the source of both products to even justify making a comment like that? You neglected to answer that question from my previous post. I have my doubts, to tell you the truth.

Originally posted by cheeky
Both Sony & Virgin have made successful claims, against abuse of copyrighted source being reproduced for commercial profit.

I'm sure they have, but I'd be interested in seeing the details of those cases before I believed that it bore any resemblance these circumstances.

Originally posted by cheeky
why do you think such licenses and agreements exist?

I'm perfectly aware why copyright law exists, it’s very good protection. I’ve been had my work ripped off more than once, and on all occasions it’s been a direct cut-n-paste, with little or no modification to the source... And that is why copyright law exists, to protect individuals from having their creative property stolen, and to prevent others from making a profit off of work that is, in actuality, not their own. That is not the case here, and if you would take the time to research the two products, you would be well aware of that fact.

Everything else aside, what I'm really questioning is your motive in bringing up this post (which is really quite old). Seems to me you're a little bit too worried about the "welfare" of people that might be in the market for this product. Your only other posts on this board are in a thread advertising the bulletin board system that you are developing, seems like quite a coincidence that you feel the obligation to "warn" people in this manner.

You really should think before you speak so strongly however, because I saw your software, and if we go by Cheeky Copyright Law, you're infringing on quite a few copyrights yourself.

[Edited by WebStyles on 05-26-2000 at 09:47 PM]

Greg

Fri 26th May '00, 1:56pm

What vB has that a *clean* UBB doesn't:

- MySQL and PHP driven
- Custom user statuses
- Easy-to-modify templates
- A decent speed
- Custom user permissions
- The ability to hide 'private' forums
- The ability to see who's on the board at the same time as you
- Different layout
- Smilies and pics in signatures can be toggled from CP
- Practically unlimited moderators
- An installation process that requires no chmod'ing and editing cplinks.htmls, but rather has a "Next > Next > Next" easy step process
- The ability to upload icons and smilies right from the CP
- The ability to jump to the newest thread or topic from the category or forum view
- The ability to import a competitor's member files, forums, archives and posts without much/any hassle
- No having to update threads after you've done a change
- You can see who posted last in a forum, or a thread
- Custom user-dependant time zones
- Much better cookie management
- An entire text box to fill in information about yourself in the profile section
- The ability to hide all your contact info (ICQ, Y!, AIM, email) as well as your online status from the board (privacy)
- You can get email notifications to a thread even if you didn't start the thread
- Automatic signature checkbox checking if a signature has been entered
- You can't snoop in turned off forums, even if you know the forum number
- Lower price
- Have the option to turn off the entire board to visitors that don't have the proper cookies

Anybody care to add to this? ;)

[Edited by Greg on 05-27-2000 at 12:59 AM]

WebStyles

Fri 26th May '00, 2:35pm

Thanks Greg, that's quite a list! I'll add a few of my own too. :)

- Custom vB codes that can be entered in the control panel.
- Add new templates at any time.
- Replacement variables, define variables in the control panel that you can use in templates, variables will be replaced with the value you specify at runtime.
- Delete forums instead of just turning them off.
- Moderator queue
- True moderation option (moderators have to approve each post before it's publicly viewable)
- Moderator notes (I don't really know what this does, but it sounds cool)
- Moderators can turn a thread off (useful if you're unsure of the content, but don't want it to be displayed until you check with the admin)
- No text is hardcoded into the script, easy to translate.
- Mass Move (by user or date)
- User management
- Extensive user permissions
- Highly configurable (everything is editable in the control panel, not just a few pre-configured options)
- Scalable. Wandrer did a test that posted 120,000 threads to a vBulletin installation over two days, no noticeable slowdown. You don't need to prune if you don't want to!
- Secure / stable / efficient. Data is stored in a mySQL database, not flat text files.
- Actively developed
- If a member changes their signature, or any profile information, the change is automatically spread through every post they've ever made.
- Signatures are not stored as part of the post, so they aren't searched (don't you hate it when you do a search and someone has that word in their signature, so it brings up all their posts?)

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 2:48pm

oh dear, typical unprofessional responses.
and excuse me but only 1 post of 30 something relates to another board, that's less than a 3% relevancy, whereas the issues here illustrate a relevancy factor of more than 90%, as will be shown

Thank you for clarifying and agreeing on my point of license agreements for protection.

I'm perfectly aware why copyright law exists, it’s very good protection. I’ve been had my work ripped off more than once, and on all occasions it’s been a direct cut-n-paste, with little or no modification to the source... And that is why copyright law exists, to protect individuals from having their creative property stolen, and to prevent others from making a profit off of work that is, in actuality, not their own

I include 2 pages of source for you to compare against that you asked for with respect to your quote.

http://www.scriptkeeper.com/ubb/faq.html
&
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/index.php?action=faq

is not the case here, and if you would take the time to research the two products, you would be well aware of that fact

maybe you can explain the high relevancy of output source for the 2 URLs above based upon your criteria of what constitutes "with little or no modification to the source"

You'd be foolish to suggest that one of pages is not a modified cut-n-paste version of the other and this trend occurs throughout the product, though modified where necessary.

and Greg has completely missed the point about the term described as "enhancements". The features he describes and you further posted! are very simple toggles and 5 line functions that can be added without any bother, for an experienced developer. You're probably not aware that despite the long list of so called features, they are in fact very easy to enhance upon an existing engine. it's where the engine came from, is the point.

It's the heart of the engine and overall framework that cause the problem.

Give me any piece of script and I can "enhance" it, this does not mean that by default the copyright suddenly becomes mine, as the original source has been modified and converted. Now unless there's a licensed agreement whereby that can happen or the original author has failed to add such protective comments. The new code is an infringement.

okay, what happens if I take all of the vB script and convert it to ASP ???????
is it suddenly mine?
because it's in a new language?

interesting question.
any takers???

I guess I'm dealing with people here, that have never been involved with copyright and code infringements - or am I wrong ?

and the motive ?

hell, this thread/s are old and repetitive because there is an issue here that hasn't "officially" been clarified. Owners are concerned about their investments and change of systems as the products in questions are too similar, despite your orientation and favouritism.

As mentioned before, I have shown both of these boards to professional colleagues and they both agree that one is a direct copy of the other or to coin a phrase "ripped off", and they're not my words. Maybe you need to step back and take an objective and impartial view of the situation as you're obviously too close to make a valued judgement

[Edited by cheeky on 05-27-2000 at 06:54 AM]

werehere

Fri 26th May '00, 3:10pm

okay, what happens if I take all of the vB script and convert it to ASP ???????
is it suddenly mine?
because it's in a new language?

interesting question.
any takers???

Actually you are missing the point. Your scenerio above would not be comparable to this. You are talking about simply porting the code to ASP in your example! Like I stated in another thread, THIS SOFTWARE IS NOT SIMPLY PORTED TO ANOTHER LANGUAGE and if you owned it you would know that, if you are familiar with them. THIS SOFTWARE WAS WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH, and it is clearly that way when you see it. This is why the above statements by some are correct, and your justifications are incorrect because you are assuming many things that are simply not true.

You are calling others unprofessional, when it is you who is the one that is assuming and jumping to conclusions and that in itself is unprofessional. So take a lesson from yourself and get some facts about the product/maker you are accusing before you go further with this untruth of yours.

[Edited by werehere on 05-27-2000 at 02:21 AM]

WebStyles

Fri 26th May '00, 3:15pm

Originally posted by cheeky
oh dear, typical unprofessional responses.
and excuse me but only 1 post of 30 something relates to another board

Close, but not quite... Half of your posts (at the time of this posting) are in that thread.

Originally posted by cheeky
The features he describes and you further posted! are very simple toggles and 5 line functions that can be added without any bother, for an experienced developer.

Read through the list again, carefully this time. I'd like to see you make a template-driven, PHP / mySQL forum with a moderator and registration queue with 20 lines of "enhancement" code added to the UBB (that's 5 lines for each "enhancement"). In addition, a lot of people in the market for a message board script are not programmers, and do not want to have to hack the code. You hack your UBB and you're then running unsupported code, and make it very difficult to upgrade the software you paid for.

Originally posted by cheeky
okay, what happens if I take all of the vB script and convert it to ASP ???????
is it suddenly mine?
because it's in a new language?

interesting question.
any takers???

You have still not answered my initial question. Have you read through the code for both forum systems? Before I, and any other members, waste any more time trying to explain to you why there is no question that vBulletin is not a translation to PHP, but a completely different engine, I'd like you to answer this.

[Edited by WebStyles on 05-26-2000 at 11:15 PM]

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 3:22pm

this thread could go on for ever!

there's no mistaking or denying that there's been a good deal of cut-n-pasting going on here and necessary script conversions to PHP, minor enhancements and minor features.
You only have to look at the "grammar" and content to see that.

As I've said before, I don't give 2 hoots, as it's not my stuff that's clearly getting copied here, so long as it stays that way.

If infopop want to chase it, that's their business but your denials of the fact are very laughable and the fact that you are so strongly defending it, stengthens my argument.

You obviously have a passion for the product having suffered a bad experience before with uBB and have obviously made strong commitments and affiliations. That's okay, no-one is undermining that.

The bottom line is, in your heart, you know the truth.
I guess vB is lucky that it only has a player like uBB to contend with.

ps: a thread like this needs a chat room not a board! ;)

WebStyles

Fri 26th May '00, 3:30pm

Originally posted by cheeky
there's no mistaking or denying that there's been a good deal of cut-n-pasting going on here and necessary script conversions to PHP, minor enhancements and minor features.
You only have to look at the "grammar" and content to see that.

Answer my above question.

Originally posted by cheeky
You obviously have a passion for the product having suffered a bad experience before with uBB and have obviously made strong commitments and affiliations. That's okay, no-one is undermining that.

That's actually not true. I still visit the Scriptkeeper forums (and not to flame anyone) and have always been friendly with their designer. I have nothing against Infopop, I just needed a beefier bulletin board, since UBB was bringing down our server and OpenTopic wasn't suited for our forum (this is the situation you'll find with many members here, by the way).

[Edited by WebStyles on 05-26-2000 at 11:31 PM]

werehere

Fri 26th May '00, 3:30pm

there's no mistaking or denying that there's been a good deal of cut-n-pasting going on here and necessary script conversions to PHP, minor enhancements and minor features.

Yes there is clearly a reason to deny that, and since you will not answer the question about seeing the code, I will assume that you have no leg to stand on whatsoever and you could go on and on and on. But you still have no idea of what you are saying, sure you may have laws down, but you do not have statements that are facts about this product and in general are just guessing and assuming, which is a shame.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 3:48pm

THIS SOFTWARE IS NOT SIMPLY PORTED TO ANOTHER LANGUAGE and if you owned it you would know that, if you are familiar with them. THIS SOFTWARE WAS WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH

no. here's the scenario....

It is very easy to port & convert an existing engine whilst disguising the source of it's origin. If you were able to develop such complicated systems such as this, you would understand that point. Also, it is common practice when converting an engine from one language to another, to analyse the software in depth and build a completely new engine from it that accomplishes essentially the same task. Therefore, software written from scratch still does not make it your copyright when it is really a working version copied from another source.

The arguments for language variant are very weak and do not hold any strength or merit.

Again, I will say that the I can "rip off" vB write it from scratch and disguise the scripts in ASP to a point where there would appear to be a clear difference between the two scripts.
This DOES NOT make it my copyright or product, as my version would have been taken from vB
(though only I would know that for definate)

So I'm at a loss as to why you think it would be ?

Also, as I am finding out, once you have a solid message board engine as a base, it is very easy to add moderator and template based functionality from a developers point of view and not a purchasers.

So I'm lost on your point here also.

The question about source has already been referred upon above in my example of converting from

1) vB PHP to my ASP
&
2) uBB to vB

If I can guarantee you that I can satisfy condition 1 and convert vB to my own ASP, this mathematical relationship defines that condition 2 is also possible.

what reinforces the argument without having the need to analyse the code at this stage is the fact that the surrounding templates such as the FAQ as I've HIGHLIGHTED AND WERE AVOIDED BY BOTH WERE-HERE MEMBERS are clearly very similar in content, layout, style & grammar. I guess putting in Portuguese would have convinced you guys that it was original, but it clearly is not.

you asked for examples and I provided them.

I may be out numbered here, because of your allegiance and commitment but there are obviously definate points and examples being given to support the copy-n-paste conversion theory that are going unanswered.

werehere

Fri 26th May '00, 3:55pm

Boy you assume the worst dont you? You are going on this assumption that it is copied, or ripped code, but why? You have provided no proof whatsoever of that. You are not looking at the obvious, which is that it actually could have been written from scratch, why?

It makes no sense to me why you are just assuming the worst without even seeing the code, so I suggest you actually look before you leap.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 4:15pm

I look at things and make valued judgements as I see them and that's impartial, based upon 12 years in leading software based technology development too.
I also value the opinions of experienced experts/colleagues in this field who have spent just 30 seconds looking at a selection of screens to come to the same conclusion.

I have not seen the vB PHP code, nor do I have to!!!!
(as I illustrated with the vB to ASP example)

What really undermines the vB argument and case is the outputted HTML source from the product as a whole and the degree of functionality and improvements it is clearly evident that the degree of similarity and the laws of probability suggest that the structures templates have been lifted from another source.

I've already provided examples of evidence supporting the cut-n-paste theory...
The 2 raw URL's that WebStyles asked me to provide show this very clearly...
I could show more, but let's take it one step at a time shall we, seeing as there's an attempt to pounce on me in numbers. This pouncing has led to a rather long winded and aggresive thread without it ever meaning to be.

The bottom line is that there is too much similarity and this is what causes concerns for most people, leading to finger-pointing.
Surely it wouldn't hurt matters to change the obvious cut-n-sections such as the FAQ to make it appear as though some original effort had been put in ?
It's these sections that always undermine the product and give the game away. It's sloppy.

From a trained eye, this looks like a clear case of cut-n-paste, but development has shifted so fast that the changes required to make it apear "original" have not happened across the product as a whole, still leaving remnants and fingerprints of the referenced material.

I haven't leapt one iota.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 4:28pm

very quickly...

I do BELIEVE it was written from scratch, as i've mentioned already this would be the best method considering it's a language change.

None of my points either challenge the coding experience or ability of the vB development team, they clearly know PHP but that itself does not make it original.

Its the raw HTML and supporting pages that really weaken any vB argument, where modifications/improvements have not had time to occur. I've provided examples of this by request to support the argument.

I can not see how this can be countered, other than an agreement that the HTML pages (where no PHP is required) have an extremely high degree of similarity thereby agreeing with WebStyles' statement of the principal of copy-n-paste breaking of licensed agreement.

It is because of this, that there is an extremely high probability and likelyhood that the engine itself was copied. Though it may be impossible to prove, that does not mean that it didn't happen.

Again, thank God that infopop are doing nothing about it.
I know which corner I'd like to be in.

[Edited by cheeky on 05-27-2000 at 08:32 AM]

Morgo

Fri 26th May '00, 4:28pm

Blimey - you really are cheeky.

You have a lot to gain by casting aspersions on the legality of the vB don't you Mr Cheeky? After all, don't you own and sell your own messaging board system that could benefit from lost vB sales? I think that this fact causes your credibility to go straight down the drain.

WebStyles

Fri 26th May '00, 4:29pm

Originally posted by cheeky
what reinforces the argument without having the need to analyse the code at this stage is the fact that the surrounding templates such as the FAQ as I've HIGHLIGHTED AND WERE AVOIDED BY BOTH WERE-HERE MEMBERS are clearly very similar in content, layout, style & grammar. I guess putting in Portuguese would have convinced you guys that it was original, but it clearly is not.

The FAQ text is mostly the same. I think the reason for this is because most of the people using vB are migrating from UBB. I personally would have changed the FAQ text back to the UBB FAQ text so my members weren't confused. You can't assume the software is ripped off just because of the FAQ text similarities... There are only so many ways you can explain what a signature is.

Originally posted by cheeky
Its the raw HTML and supporting pages that really weaken any vB argument, where modifications/improvements have not had time to occur. I've provided examples of this by request to support the argument.

This is where you are missing the point, and where other peoples' confusion comes from as well. This bulletin board is template based, you can use any HTML you please. The HTML on this site are the default templates that come with the software. There are templates for everything, not just a header and footer. None of the output you see on these pages exist in the software. Look beyond the surface!

If you look hard enough, you can find similarities in every forum system available, because guess what... They all exist to fufill pretty much the same need. Furthermore, since you just answered that you have not seen the code, and therefore have absolutely no knowledge to back up your "points". I'm not going to reply to this thread anymore.

[Edited by WebStyles on 05-27-2000 at 12:45 AM]

Morgo

Fri 26th May '00, 4:30pm

Originally posted by cheeky
Its the raw HTML...

You cannot copyright HTML.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 4:51pm

MORGAN MORGAN MORGAN
I don't think you guys understand what's being said here. I haven't nothing to gain from this thread other than support the comments made by other users from professional experience of development and copyright theft.

I have no interest in the vB market. The board that you mention is not being sold or supports PHP or mySQL. I am currently talking with a company in Newcastle,UK who have a muti-million pound budget for such tools.

Why would I bother my time in here if that's my plans ?
think again, before you jump to wild accusations.

The reason, why I bother, is that I don't like to see the "passing off" of one product for another, especially when it's so close to home and we will be operating a like open source policy as uBB have done.

So what was your point again?

Jessica,
I was expecting a loss of interest from you after supplying the URL's as you requested. ;)

I understand the migration principle but it is obvious that an open source policy has been abused to the extent that whole HTML pages have been directly stripped, copied without reference to source.

It doesn't matter what reasons or excuses you have, as I mentioned previously, this issue and thread should be replied by the developer who know the real truth.

THIS IS CLEARLY AN INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT AND YOU KNOW IT IS
WHICH IS WHY YOU'RE BACKING OUT.

YOU ADMIT THE CONTENT IS THE SAME AND YOUR STATEMENT OF BREACH OF COYRIGHT EARLIER SUPPORTS THIS
YOU ARE EFFECTIVELY SAYING THAT...
vB have infringed upon infopop - well done!

Again, thank you're lucky stars that infopop are crap.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 4:59pm

thanks Morgo,

I didn't realise there was a distinction between copyrighting different languages????

you can with php but not html, interesting!

Can you do me a big favour and copy one of my sites
(the raw html that is) and put your copyright underneath.

...and let's just see what happens! ;)
make it very clear where your URL is and that you don't give a toss about any HTML page copyrights and will accept the full costs for any actions arising from a dispute of said materials.

come on, get real.

like I said earlier, I appear to be dealing with people here that have had no real experience of copyrights, other than what they've heard or may have read a little about.

bira

Fri 26th May '00, 5:42pm

You really are arguing for nothing. There has already been a ruling in the US Supreme Court whereby Sony sued a company that wrote a playstation PC emulator with the identical look & feel of a playstation. What's more, in order to write that emulator, they cracked the Sony Playstation OS code, so as to understand how it works and to emulate it in their code.

So Sony sued, and this trial went all the way to the Supreme Court, and Sony lost. The decision was that:

1)in computer programing: the copyright relates to the code itself (tangible copyrighting). Since the emulator wasn't even written in the same language of the Sony Playstation, nor ran the same processes, there was no question that on that count there was no copyright infringment.

2) in look and feel: there is no legal copyright on interface. Examples cited in court were the Apple -> Windows interface; the explorer.exe -> Litestep interface; The Works \ Word Perfect \ Corel Office Suite -> Windows Office interface, etc.

3) As far as design goes, legally binding copyright can be inferred to trademarks and art design. Since no Sony trademarks were used, there was no trademark or copyright infringement. As an example, the red scribbled "Coca Cola" font-face IS a trademark. But if you wrote "Hola Hopa" in that exact same interface, it would be perfectly legal.

4) As far as the programers cracking the Sony code: that was, in fact, the only precedent set in that important case. The Supreme Court judges decides, unanimously, that it was "reasonable use". According to the copyright laws - international one as well - you are not infringing copyright if you make reasonable use in a protected piece. For example, you are not allowed to redistribute Vanity Fair magazine articles. But if you cut a page from it and hang it on the office wall next to the copy stand where hundreds of your workplace employees can see it, it's considered "reasonable use". The judges in the Sony case said that since they did not crack the code and redistributed it, or modified it, or in any way damaged the original product's nature, it was reasonable use. They further added that it was in the interest of consumers and therefore warrants even more the "reasonable use".

All the above applies to a T to the vB v. UBB situation.

There are also, of course, the cases of Sun v Microsoft about the MS-Java (where Microsoft lost only after Sun proved that Microsoft used the exact same code!); the Apple v Microsoft case (where Apple lost).

And one could also point at Xoom and Geocities; hundreds of portals around the world v Yahoo; Post-It notes and Stick-It notes, etc.

And by the way cheeky, before you go all bubbly about the FAQ text, I urge you to ask Ted who wrote that text. It wasn't him or his fellow workers at Infopop :)

bira

Fri 26th May '00, 5:49pm

Cheeky, regarding your question if any of us would represent vB on this matter if they were to be sued by UBB? The answer is yes, I would. You know why? Because it's a sure win. Been there, Done that

(which reminds me of another example - Pepsi! :))

[Edited by bira on 05-27-2000 at 11:50 AM]

theprof

Fri 26th May '00, 6:45pm

This is my view.

Bulletin boards all have a general function. You type stuff in, it appears on a page. People can view what you've written and they can reply to it.

I've looked at teh code, and although I'm lousy with PHP, I'm a cgi/perl enthusiast, and can safely say that in many ways, VB and UBB are vastly different. In terms of how they go about doing stuff and in terms of functionality. The same argument was brought up with UBB and EZBoard. Buta gain, they are worlds apart.

Let me put it this way. A ford and a toyota do pretty much the same thing. But can ford sue toyota if it makes faster, cheaper cars? They both use wheels. They both have a steering wheel. They both have seats and run on fuel.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 7:06pm

okay the prof hasn't got a clue what's going on here.
so why bother with licensed software and legal documents of copyrights if you can just rip it off, rewrite and re brand it? don't be stupid. Different industries have different rules and you just can't go around applying one to another willy nilly.

A nice scenario, however you fail to add the date of this legislation and that each case sets new precendence and standards and that each is case is taken almost as a unique entity. The laws are forever changing and really it's up to the opinion of the arbitrator at the end of the day who all have variations on the theme. It's really what they see as being "fair" and "reasonable" or "what is probable" or "likely cause." and effect.

Actually, no you are not permitted to write "Hola Hopa" in the same type face and design if the product is similar and seen as possible competition. This could confuse the general public into believing that one product is a derivative of the other and as such would be technically termed as passing off. You can not do this. But you ca do this if the product is not affecting the business of that it immitates.

You also mention US law, however, laws change from country to country and the UK laws are very tough in this area. As vB are UK based and we are too - every one should be aware of UK law and legislation, particular where innovation is created in an open source format.

I agree with your example of non-commercial use of magazine articles, that is considered fair and reasonable use. obviously.

If Ted at infopop did not either produce the FAQ section and that too was deliberated copy, then he's just as guilty as vB as WebStyles confirms.

Can someone confirm where this source is further replicated????
otherwise I will have to assume that uBB is the primary source of this content

Also, emulated software (in the UK I believe) still holds original copyright for a period no less than 10 years after it's creation. The use of such emulation of copyrighted software is illegal. A license or purchase of the emulated software must be bought in order to execute the software correctly.

The point here is that there is a clear comparison of similar technology and page format/content that directly affects the running of a competitive operation. It is this direct and competitive nature, that is cause for concern, whereby vB is taking business from uBB with technology and content that appears to be stripped down and improved upon, but not concealed in areas that I've pointed out.
That doesn't change the fact that users are displeased with uBB - that isn't the point. The point is that the open source of one project is apparently being duplicated for commercial gain and appropriate support to ensure the smooth transaction of users from one service to another. This transaction and gap in the market is as a result of the former company increasing their licensing costs and lack of quality updates and the need for said member base to seek similar product.

By using "identical" pages as I've demonstrated, this shows a lack of covering tracks in duplicating already commercial and competitive materials as a direct competitor - that can hardly be construed as "fair play" or "reasonable".

Again, I redirect you to werehere's comments that he would consider my conversion of vB to ASP as illegal, though you say different.

INTERESTING CLASH OF OPINIONS THERE!
(either one of you would be in breach)
perhaps you guys need to talk with each other before you contradict yourselves?

also, there is not a clear cut outcome in this case.
and of the main example that you gave, you mentioned several big players.

Can you advise the board of the situation if vB came up against a big player or a company that is heavily financed ?
would vB even be able to afford the costs to go to court if allegations were brought on them or would they realise that the efforts would be futile ?

many a company has lost a battle before reaching the court, you fail to make this point also.
It's all hypothetical really in this case, as I've said before as InfoPop look ****e and wouldn't know how to put together a coherent case to support such a claim.

UserName

Fri 26th May '00, 9:00pm

Originally posted by cheeky
You also mention US law, however, laws change from country to country and the UK laws are very tough in this area. As vB are UK based and we are too - every one should be aware of UK law and legislation, particular where innovation is created in an open source format.

What is your point? The laws of some countries prohibit people from using the Internet at all. The laws in some countries don't recognize foreign copyrights or trademarks at all. No matter what you do on the Internet, you're breaking the law somewhere. You think "Everyone should be aware of UK law and legislation" - why? The UK is a small country in a big world. Get over yourself.

The point here is that there is a clear comparison of similar technology and page format/content that directly affects the running of a competitive operation. It is this direct and competitive nature...

Gee, that reminds me of the Apple vs. Windows issue that was brought up without you ever paying any attention. Have you ever seen a copy of Netscape and Internet Explorer side by side? You should write to Netscape and give them your brilliant idea - maybe they never thought of suing Microsoft - I'm sure that they could have won, at least in the UK, listening to you go on. It's a shame that no one over at Netscape is as bright as you appear (to yourself) to be.

Can you advise the board of the situation if vB came up against a big player or a company that is heavily financed ? would vB even be able to afford the costs to go to court if allegations were brought on them or would they realise that the efforts would be futile ?

This is pure genius. Do you know any company in the world that can guarantee that they will win in court, or have the power to fight every court case to a conclusion that will make all of its customers happy? Microsoft is about to get smashed by the U.S. government - the U.S. phone company was broken up - Tobacco companies are being sued for billions of dollars. There are no sure things in life, if you're not willing to spend $200, then don't. I can tell you that you aren't going to go very far in life living in fear of everything and anything that *might* happen. You obviously enjoy the attention that this thread is bringing you, so I'm probably foolish for even responding, but your words are just too funny for me to ignore.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 9:36pm

oh dear. another plonker.
the point about UK law is that vB is based in the UK and the practice that is clearly being operated here, is not tolerated.

simple.

your examples are very poor.

Microsoft has clearly established a strong hold in the windows market forcing competition out. It's this monopoly and unfair play that is at question.
In addition to this, a number of top companies are being punished for exploiting the privacy of it's userbase.

This is bad practice, and it's exactly that kind of practice that's occured. Essentially, what we have here is an upgraded version of old technology which has been taken from an open source site with copyrighted content without consent, but with a smarter backend.

let's deal with the issue at hand rather than external cases, as each one is assessed independatly anyway and bears no relation to the other.

I've had "5" emails alone this morning confirming that vB is just a "rip off" of uBB. Your entitled to your opinions and favouritism, but this does not dispute the fact that it's a plain and simple copy.

ANY IDIOT CAN SEE THAT - OR MAYBE NOT !

What ever happened to originality ?

Just because someone else copied from another site (maybe uBB did) doesn't make it right here. 2 wrongs do not make a right.

I'm unsure of your line about legal guarantees, where did that spring from?
You are talking about major corporations that have have spent millions on resources and technology. Not a small outfit in the UK that's nicked someone else's code, dressed it up as best as possible with flaws and manufactured it as a competitive product.

this in anyone's book, is a breach of copyright.

Does anyone know what the latest best selling book is ?
According to you lot, I am able to buy this, change the last chapter and title and sell it as my own and make a fortune.

that's clever - why bother doing any work at all?

why not let vB do their modifications to uBB and then we'll all nick it, slap a few different things in there and call it ours - get rid of the footer and away you go.

or does this then become a breach?
- make your minds and be consistant in your arguments.

again, I'm still getting very little feedback on the content that webstyles described as being copyrighted and protected which is clearly duplicated on this site all over the place.

The bottom line is that it's a copy-n-paste job that's a little bit rough round the edges, clearly showing the blueprint of the referenced materials. And you guys are so p'd off with uBB that you'll take the next best thing, no matter of it's origin.

cheeky

Fri 26th May '00, 9:43pm

glad you like the thread.

There's no glory or fame here, only points being made and countered regarding an issue that is clearly rearing it's ugly head time after time by a number of different users.
That in itself should tell you that there is some concerns.

On a technical level, I don't like the format of the nested tables as with very long threads, such as this, the web browser will not render the results until the nested table is closed.

it would be better, as I've suggested before to empty the buffer per posting so that the screen is filled with information - that way messages can be read in a split second rather than the L O N G 10 seconds it currently takes now with a blank screen.

Because the format of the board has symmetry, this would be a better approach.

Greg

Sat 27th May '00, 12:26am

I love this thread too. It just goes to show how far people are willing to go to protect that archaic thing they call the UBB. :P

cheeky

Sat 27th May '00, 12:41am

no. not at all.

I don't like uBB, I think it's crap! ;)
I'm not out to defend uBB, as I mentioned earlier, I don't give 2 hoots, I'm merely re-affirming the concerns of many who are p'd of with uBB but are unsure about the legalities of vB.

To really clear this matter up once and for all, read my post in the other thread regarding someones concerns about investing in vB. Basically vB are going have to cough up some dosh and get some legal advice, investigating the concerns already mentioned and whether there would be any cause for concern from the point of view of perspective buyers. It doesn't matter if you think it's the "bees knees", you must get that official paperwork signed!

Once this is done, the thread is closed. But until then, there are outstanding questions that have had no real assurance.

I'd like a board to be loaded with features that I can pick and choose from or customise that's also very cheap.
But with respect to this board there isn't one yet that really stands out. no where near.

There are far too many clones around, all copying each other. it's daft really.

but what does concern me, is the flippant disregard for other people's code especially where copyrights exist but it's just "lifted", "converted" and "updated".

naughty, naughty.

Craig A

Sat 27th May '00, 1:16am

Actually, Ted and his chums were sent a copy of the system before it was released with the intention of having them distribute it. They declined this offer and so John decided to distribute it himself. I don't know how the correspondance went on this issue, but I feel sure that their acceptance of vBulletin without any apparent protest means that they have no problem with it. Why not mail Ted and see what he has to say on the subject ?

See http://pub6.ezboard.com/fopentopicalternativesopentopicalternativesgeneral .showMessage?topicID=35.topic for more info.

cheeky

Sat 27th May '00, 1:41am

nice. the first bit of useful content in 12 hours

an interesting thread, though it doesn't actually give any answers but does shed doubt over the legality of the improved PHP uBB version, renamed vB.

why would so many uBB users be concerned and question the legal implications if there clearly wasn't an issue?
if there were obvious differences, the point and issue would never have been raised about copyrights.
- however it was and still is.

no reply from InfoPop then ?

why did they decline ?

well, I guess you can only really make a case against a rival board, once that board becomes active and commercial. then again, maybe they are just too busy with the OpenTopic feature or really don't give a hoot.

At the end of the day, the ball is in InfoPops court, but if I was vB I'd make damn sure I knew exactly where I stood and make that information public knowledge to reassure everyone that all is well and will remain that way.

werehere

Sat 27th May '00, 3:43am

an interesting thread, though it doesn't actually give any answers but does shed doubt over the legality of the improved PHP uBB version, renamed vB.

There you go assuming again.... It sheds no doubt at all, because this is a NEW system, even if you do not care to believe it is. I would recommend you give it a rest since you cannot prove anything whatsoever, and you have not even seen the code you are so highly accusing.

cheeky

Sat 27th May '00, 5:10am

you'll have to excuse me as my server has just gone and nuked all my accounts so I'm a little pissed off right now having to republish in addition to the pathetic excuses I'm getting from existing users of vB

is your native tongue English as you're having a real tough time understanding the lingo?

RIGHT!
I am sick and tired of writing the same old crap to ignorant individuals who fail to see what the points are, even when constructive points are made based upon points already brought up by other members previously.

Let's look at the product as a whole.
we have front end, engine and back end

"THE FAQ SECTION IS A RIP OFF"
- just take a look for yourself
in addition to that, all the other supporting material is directly COPIED too. So basically the front end bares an uncanny STRONG RESEMBLANCE to uBB.

hell, people are joking in here that once Open Topic is done vB will release the same, just a few days later - what a surprise! how ingenious! clever aren't they?

no don't just do this, show it to a layperson, a friend, your mom, whatever, who knows sweet f.a about BB's and see if they can tell them apart.

(I've just tested it on the girlfriend who knows nothing of what I'm writing here, and she says that they're the same, okay we both know that there are some fundamental changes underneath, but she's right)

then take it to a group of professionals who will have an unbiased opinion and see what they say.

The front end can effectively be defined as the Manual, Manuals for products are copyrighted as supporting reference for said content. It is not just the engine that is being discussed here.

There has been complete abuse of COPYING RAW HTML FILES from another service, modifying them ever so slightly, uploading them and calling them the property of someone else. you are mad to think otherwise.
Creating such content and reference files can take quite a lot of production time, researching and thinking about presenting the page, read what webstyles said about producing similar content and saying that if someone copied that, they would be in the wrong
- cool huh? a fellow were-here partner, saying that!
- you two, really ought to sit down and communicate better

- it all costs time and money, being the work of one party. Then guess what someone, comes along, saves it off, does a quick switch a round and change the odd word here and there - job done, wow that was easy.

not only that but the so called brand new system, is merely a conversion of uBB from flat to database with some new structures, read the threads! it says that - whoopie do.

The thread that I paid reference too, clearly indicates the feelings from others about the concerns of copyright.
Think about it, why do THEY raise the question in the first place?
jesus - what a dumb ass

I'm merely playing devil's advocate here.

If the product was brand spanking new, there would be NO issues here - this is clearly not the case and it's been going for some time. You can deny it all you want, the threads are there from numerous people, it's just I'm a bit sick and tired of no-one actually saying

- "yeah, okay we took our "inspiration" from uBB"
where really "inspiration" means we "copied" it.

Open up 2 windows, one with uBB and the other vB and tell me honestly that if uBB did not exist that vB would have come up with the content that they did. Nah, i thought not.

(a slight generalisation here but the degrees of similarity can be assumed to be in the 90% region)

The pages look the same.
The pages have the same content.
The pages are formatted the same
The pages share the same functionality (enhanced)
The pages have the same structures.

I assume a 10 - 15% degree of change and improvements upon copied materials

Also, take a look at the other threads on this board where other members are agreeing with the logic of the statements that I've given. I've also tried to remain focused and balanced offering solutions on how this issue can be resolved but some of you die-hards are just too closed off to appreciate the concerns that other users may have of using such a system.

otherwise, why would they create such threads in the first place?

**** just get Infopop to say "fine go ahead use it we don;t care" or get a legal bod to say " this product is okay and can not be considered to have been derived from another product thereby breaking no terms of agreements/copyrights"
- that's all that's being asked here.

like I said before and it appears as though I have to repeat myself to you again!
If i took vB and converted to a "new" system as you like to put it, does this then make it mine ?

- don't be stupid

I have seen the raw engine code, I don't have to, you only have to look at all of the surrounding files to see that it's clearly been ripped off.

I've tried to be subtle with you, but it doesn't seem to work...go on take a look and tell me different, that the surrounding files aren't virtually identical and that the system (regardless of language variant of newity) bears a strong resemblance to ubb.

go on - tell us all what you see.

there's really not much more that can be said, other than either vB or InfoPop making a statement and press release. They're being very cagey about the whole thing.
- let's get it out in the open, one way or the other and stop this bickering

I just wish there were a few more honest people around. It's a shame

stv

Sat 27th May '00, 5:53am

If UBB were to place suit against vb then i think they would be shooting them selves in the foot. They have openly taken features from other products and users and claimed it to be their original work... they would just be giving precedence to claims from other sources...

I have to say that I am biased on this point as I have been working with mutt on ubb code buttons and ted just added them to opentopic and when mutt posted saying that he would have appreciated a e-mail asking first ted claimed not only that the buttons were his original idea but even more he didn't know who mutt was... mutt the creator of ubbcodebuttons, private messaging and more...

Steven

[Edited by stv on 05-27-2000 at 04:54 PM]

werehere

Sat 27th May '00, 6:16am

Cheeky,
You are just taking this and turning it into personal attacks, and blaming VB users now. It is not my intention to sway your judgement, nor do I care what you personaly think. I am debating this because I have seen the code and do not find it to be a copy of any sort, and the code (99% of this software) proves that, but you are to thick headed to see that. I would not argue with you at all if I questioned that it was a copy, but I do not find it to be, so I will not agree with you. It has nothing to do with feelings for UBB or VB.

I find that your accusations would incriminate just about every BBS on the market with your way of thinking. You are playing devels advocate with *myths* about how the code is copied, and to be honest I do not know how the FAQ page is laid out, nor do I personaly care. That is such a small thing that really does not prove your point in my mind. If you could compare code (the heart of the system) and prove copied sections fine, but you have never even seen the code, which makes your point useless and invalid.

You say to show someone VB compared to UBB and see what they say, really that means nothing whatsoever but I did so anyways. I have shown my mother many and she thought they all were identicle (VB, UBB, Ezboard, and phorum). What did that prove? Boy I hope it does not mean that the UBB should go after everyone *L*.

This topic started as "Polls inside thread posts" which I think is a great idea (even if OT has it, and delphi used first), and it has now veered way off topic, so probably should be closed considering it is going no where!

WebStyles

Sat 27th May '00, 6:31am

I know I said I wasn't going to reply to this anymore, but still...

Originally posted by cheeky
The pages look the same.
The pages have the same content.
The pages are formatted the same
The pages share the same functionality (enhanced)
The pages have the same structures.

You have based every single one of your opinions on the templates this board uses. If you had actually seen the code, you would know this.

Isn't software development all about offering a product that does everything the competitor's software does... But with more features and faster?

Originally posted by cheeky
again, I'm still getting very little feedback on the content that webstyles described as being copyrighted and protected which is clearly duplicated on this site all over the place.

You took what I said totally out of context. I have had graphics stolen from me, which is quite a bit different than code.

Did you know that UBB was designed to be a replacement for WWWBoard? Because WWWBoard didn't have the features Ted wanted.

cheeky

Sat 27th May '00, 6:37am

I think we should give it rest now, but I shall add a final word and say that having a working version of a BB infront of you makes it a damn sight easier to understand and make your own "copied" version.

developing from "scratch" without any "assistance" is a long development process if it is planned and though out correctly.

have you ever made a BB ?

Most people are unable to comprehend the technical skills and knowledge required to do such a system, and I'm looking forward to vB doing a threaded (much more complicated, recursive threads)
version, perhaps in the future (it's nice to have choice)

now does anyone know where there's some open threaded source for vB to sneak a peak at ?

good night ! ;)

werehere

Sat 27th May '00, 6:54am

I should also state that I am not a lawyer, and not a law student. I do understand that the FAQ page and some other small aspects such as that may not be good, but the point I am trying to make is that the heart of this system is not the UBB, and not simply ported, which does make it considerably different.

I would not mind seeing VB go the extra mile and make the FAQ and any other of the small similarities more uniques. That would be easy and may set aside future doubt I guess, also making either this forum or another test forum with a very unique look through templates so others can see what it is capable of looking like:)

stv

Sat 27th May '00, 7:03am

I agree with werehere 110%...

werehere you are a great asset to this board :)

werehere

Sat 27th May '00, 7:19am

Thank you:)

I am just a person who enjoys BBS's, so I tend to get involved.

cheeky

Sat 27th May '00, 12:27pm

we all love forums and especially any new emerging technologies that help support the communties, else we wouldn't feel so pationate about it all.

thanks for confirming the similarities and it that all it takes is a little effort to make it different. Which is exactly what has been 1/2 done here. It's just the job of "changing" it all is incomplete. ;)

James

Sun 28th May '00, 1:03am

You seem to be hell-bent of discrediting vBulletin even to the extent of personal attacks on other members of this community. Just for the record, vB was developed from existing Jelsoft technologies, without reference in any way to the UBB code. You assumed that because the interface to vB is similar to UBB, we have ripped off Infopop's product. That is simply not the case.

You are free to make comparisons between UBB and vB, but since you do not know the full story I would appreciate it if you stop attacking vBulletin. I know you are playing Devil's Advocate, but I think that you've overstepped the mark.

All the best,

James

[Edited by James on 05-28-2000 at 05:05 PM]

cheeky

Sun 28th May '00, 1:46am

no not all, if you read the threads you'll see that I played devils advocate for a number of users who have brought the same repetitive issues up time & time again.

The strength of the threads was encouraged and promoted by the ignorance of some of your registered clients.

Again, you mention that vB has no uBB code but I was asked by clients of your system to provide example URL's where it is very clear that, this is not the case.
I was asked - I provided, to support the constructive nature of the thread.

This line of content suggested quite clearly that vB evolved from uBB to a strong degree and that remnants of uBB script is still evident on the existing vB version as indicated. Though not necessarily the PHP engine.

Also, if you note the beginning of my questioning, I made it very clear that any replies to such questions should come DIRECTLY FROM YOURSELVES and no-one else. However, it was your clients (who also do not know the "real" situation that acted unprofessionally by interferring, where their interferance was not required or asked for, quite the opposite)

Therefore it was I that felt under attack from your clients, after making perfectly clear that the issues and questions could only be answered by yourself.

NO I DO NOT ACCEPT THAT I OVERSTEPPED THE MARK AS EXPLAINED
YOUR CLIENTS DID.
...by not respecting the nature of the inquiry and request that the answers come from vB directly.
Anything else would merely incite a mild panic and retribution.

The responsibility of this as I have made perfectly clear falls within and you can deal with that as you see accordingly.

James

Sun 28th May '00, 4:14am

Derrick,

Note: this is a reply to two threads:
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=167&pagenumber=2
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=636

NO I DO NOT ACCEPT THAT I OVERSTEPPED THE MARK AS EXPLAINED
YOUR CLIENTS DID.
...by not respecting the nature of the inquiry and request that the answers come from vB directly.
Anything else would merely incite a mild panic and retribution.

If anything Derrick, you are the person responsible for making a proverbial mountain out of a mole hill. Heck, if you really didn't want any other users from answering your message, you should have sent me an email direct!

To answer your points:

First of all, how do you explain "copies" of uBB html source on your site ?

As I stated before, vBulletin was originally a UBB rewrite. Before releasing the product commercially, we redesigned all the templates with our own html. If any ubb html exists, it's purely coincidental.

Really there would be no need for legal represenation if an agreement had been struck with InfoPop, so I'm a little confused as to why you say you have someone looking into now.

Our solicitor is not looking into issues in relation to Infopop... but the exact nature of what he is doing at the moment is none of your business.

Thank you for confirming what I've been saying all along that vB evolved from uBB as a rewrite/conversion - this is EXACTLY the point I've been making without having to see the source but some people here have been contesting and confusing that issue.

No one was contesting that vBulletin is a UBB rewrite.

I am not really sure how your anti-vBulletin tirade will benefit you... consider me jumping to conclusions (it's only fair isn't it) but aren't you releasing your own message board software fairly soon?

To be honest, comments such as this: "now does anyone know where there's some open threaded source for vB to sneak a peak at ?" make me feel that you are attacking us for all it is worth without being rational. These comments are also potentially libellous.

You have certainly overstepped the mark on this discussion. Many of your comments have either personally attacked other forum members, or made unsubstantiated claims about vBulletin.

If you would like to continue this discussion, please take it to email.

Regards,

James

Greg

Sun 28th May '00, 7:45am

Way to go James.

Cheeky, you've said twice now you want to give it a rest with this issue, yet you continue to bring it up. Why?

[Edited by Greg on 05-28-2000 at 06:47 PM]

cheeky

Sun 28th May '00, 8:18am

Firstly Greg replied to this thread as this message was being written.

Cheeky, you've said twice now you want to give it a rest with this issue, yet you continue to bring it up. Why?

here's the answer:-

How can I discontinue the thread, if I am constantly being challenged by vB members who have been requested specifically not to be involved as they can not answer the concerns raised.
Your question merely extends the thread by prompting a reply!

- now that was a stupid posting. thank you Greg.

back to James.

1)
You failed to confirm that I did not request responses from your clients but yourselves in response to questions that have genuinely been asked by several independant board users.

That instruction was very clear and ignored by vB users.

You can take that point up with those members that abused that request and not myself - it was very clear.

Again I shall reaffirm as is evident in the threads that I am not responsible for the development and expansion of this closed request for information to be supplied by vB developers.

However, I did reply truthfully and only to those clients that wished to ignore that request and challenge, of which I was entitled to reply with sufficient and appropriate content.

2)
You contradict the statements made by your clients.

This is part of the concerns that need to be resolved as users and clients are lead to believe different statements.

3)
Any "co-incidental" copies of scripts is something for you to resolve with InfoPop as I've already mentioned, though they may not be interested.

We both know and understand the situation here, where as other users can not.

4)
You are correct to state that your legal investigations you are apparently at the moment are none of my business!

I thank you, that's very assuring for all concerned.
point noted.

However...

this point was raised by individuals who were interested in the legal requirements of using the vB technology.

As vBulletin has no made any legal statement to date, it was both a genuine and obvious request by concerned individuals and that such statement should be produced in exchange for commercial use of licensed software.

Your refusal to make public any legal statement at this time is very clear and accepted as the members can now appreciate and draw their own conclusions.

Though the release of any licensed software should contain such materials.

5)
The statements I made regarding sourcing 3rd party thread solutions has been taken out of context.

The comment was made in reply to one of your clients who was in denial that vB was developed from uBB, contrary to your statement.
Therefore it stands correct.

I have no problems in continuing this thread personally by email of which you readers can interpret as they wish.
I consider it to be a direct censorship where issues of public concern regarding are being kept private.

I will no longer contribute to this thread but correspond by email and ask that you apply the same ruling to your board users.

I would ask the other members of the vB community to respect both James' and my wish to leave this issue to be resolved privately at which point answers to the questions raised by other members can be made public in the future as required.

James, feel free to issue any libel against me as you mentioned in your previous post.
I am more than comfortable to accept such a challenge, though we both know that will never happen.

So don't make such a rediculous statement, that is very irresponsible, unsupported and dangerous territory.

thank you.
Derrick

I ASK THE MODERATOR TO CLOSE THE THREAD SO THAT PRIVATE DISCUSSIONS CAN OCCUR

note: I reserve the right to reply to any remarks that are unsubstantiated or are considered defamatory or personal upon my person.

Greg

Sun 28th May '00, 8:27am

How was it a stupid post? You seem to want to insult EVERYONE that posts in this thread! The fact that you can't put a topic to rest because your ego is threatened speaks volumes. Now you'll probably reply to this with some stupid smart-assed remark hoping I'll 'learn my lesson.'

[Edited by Greg on 05-28-2000 at 07:30 PM]

cheeky

Sun 28th May '00, 9:18am

well of course!
read my previous footnote.

some of you people seem to have a real difficulty understanding both the wishes of myself and vB developer.

I ask again, that the moderator deals with this member and respects the nature and closure of this thread.

the comments made byself (again) show quite clearly how my statement of incitement by another vB members holds true - you are obviously looking to stir it, when the two main principles here are trying to resolve the issues so that the original questions can be answered.

If you can not, which is most likely, positively contribute and provide answers to the query then I think that you are abusing both our wishes to settle this matter privately.

maybe you should take note, from the other vB members, step back, use some constraint and discipline, how ever hard it may be for you.

you have nothing subtantial to contribute to this thread

Greg

Sun 28th May '00, 10:28am

See what I mean. :P

cheeky

Sun 28th May '00, 10:32am

yes I do.

you like to get the last word in

:p

Mike Sullivan

Sun 28th May '00, 11:03am

1. How the hell did this get in "Polls inside thread posts"? :D

2. This point is kinda becoming moot anyway, as James has told us that he has someone looking into this.

3. Before this completely deteriorates into a flame war, I suggest closing this (as have others).

Now, to this bulk of this message.

This thread is pretty interesting. (IMO) Some out of hand, some not. :)

I know I said I wanted this closed, but I have to ask cheeky one thing.
RE: The FAQ Pages
I'll agree that they look very similar, the same at first glance. Is that your only gripe? So if vB were to "spice" it up with some nice looking tables, would that be ok? Just wondering...

I would also like to comment on one other thing.
If I'm getting what cheeky is saying, wouldn't your own CoolMB fall under this category? ( http://www.coolmb.com/CoolMB/index.asp?cMB_SessionID=Fedruquosukefuluffutgidoga fa ) I understand that it's not finished yet, but it resembles a UBB, except that it is "threaded."
Couldn't Infopop theoretically call the same thing on you as they could on vB?

I don't mean to start a flame war here, just wanted to get some more...concrete...info.

Greg

Sun 28th May '00, 11:22am

He also ripped the 'RULES' thing at the bottom of every board, from vB.

cheeky

Sun 28th May '00, 11:52am

first of all, it was not I that started the griping, I am merely in a stronger position to carry their questioning forward with knowledge in both areas of development and copyright protection.

I paid reference to a single section that that was asked for by a vB client. They're are many more.
Basically, the front-end appears very much to have followed the old favorite ...

"save as.." - your filename here
and re-upload as your own web page.

and that trend continues throught-out though mostly rewritten in the underlying technology. vB have confirmed that vB is rewritten from uBB, so why not just let vB get their legal beagle to make the appropriate statements?

As "webstyles" said, she believed that where evidence existed that webpages had simply been copied (and modified so slightly), there was a breach of copyright.
They are her words, associated with the front end to this site.

What appears to cause doubt in peoples minds is that so much is so similar and a simple acknowledgment to the fact from vB can easily remedy any concerns with uBB.

As I said before, I don't give 2 hoots what vB do with their pages, they make their own commercial decisions and have to live with that. Only InfoPop have a possible issue here. And only vB will know where they stand. It's really a question of assurance for those that are concerned about such similarities. It is them that you should redirect your attention to.

As to the supplied referenced URL and supporting pages.
There is currently no source available to render such threads which is a complicated recursive algorithm.
The entire Board is completely different to uBB, in terms of style, content, functionality, structures and how the technology is driven from page to page. There are many inticate systems installed that simply do not exist on another board. The front end is also different though the only page that bears a resemblance to the aforementioned site is the index page. This gives a possible visual relevancy of less than 4%.

InfoPop are more than welcome to make a challenge.

The point here is that it is possible to create a significatly different system of BB that is simply not a revised version of a competitor's board. There will inevitably be some similarities but not to the extent as shown between vB and uBB where the visual similarities approach the 90+% mark and the front end raw html hits a similar high mark

I have no problems whatsoever in issuing copyrights, terms and conditions, applicable policies and service of contracts.

GREG:

congratulations for falling for the trap by using the word "rip" on a non-commercial product.
From a legal standpoint, there's a big difference between using that word as has been done to describe vB. You have effectively stated that as a profit seeking commercial product and service vB has "ripped" off uBB.

thank you, that "red herring" will now be replaced with the correct template before going commercial.

Greg

Sun 28th May '00, 11:58am

It's not 'uBB' it's UBB.

And I'm obviously just trying to piss you off and it seems to be working so far. ;)

WebStyles

Sun 28th May '00, 12:03pm

Originally posted by cheeky
As "webstyles" said, she believed that where evidence existed that webpages had simply been copied (and modified so slightly), there was a breach of copyright.
They are her words, associated with the front end to this site.

You are twisting around my words. As has been stated earlier in this thread, software "look and feel" cannot be copywrited, only the code itself. So, if someone downloaded Yahoo's site, and uploaded it to their own server, and claimed it was their creation, Yahoo's copywrite would have been violated. What you are saying is totally irrelevant in this case.

theprof

Sun 28th May '00, 12:07pm

John, this thread has outlived his usefulness. Let Cheeky take whatever greviances he has with you using email.

cheeky

Sun 28th May '00, 12:46pm

Originally posted by WebStyles

You are twisting around my words. As has been stated earlier in this thread, software "look and feel" cannot be copywrited, only the code itself. So, if someone downloaded Yahoo's site, and uploaded it to their own server, and claimed it was their creation, Yahoo's copywrite would have been violated. What you are saying is totally irrelevant in this case.

not at all,
I understand your concern but have you really analysed raw "HTML code" ????

it is not the look and feel, but how the look and feel is GENERATED. It is the raw HTML code which as any code can be protected and has nothing to do with PHP that was discussed.

please look again and compare the source of the two, so that you can see.
Don't just look at the web browser result.

therefore I agree with you that code (no matter what language it is) can and should be protected and that it is this code that is the issue.

It is possible to create a "look & feel" by a vast number of permuations of coding, which is why so many commercial sites can be competitive within the same industry, yet "look similar" in nature.

So yes, I AGREE that for the most part it is acceptable to get away with a similar "look & feel" !!!!

HOWEVER, I think you'll find that the underlying script is pretty unique in each case

- WHICH IS NOT THE CASE HERE
suggesting something untowards.

Really this thread would never have got so long if members had not been bothered to address the question of coding, but instead skip around the point with "look and feel".

It is coding that can be copyrighted and it is coding that is the point.

vB describes the duplicate code as a "co-incidence".
Any large scale "co-incidence" of code can only be viewed one way.