I do not understand what is the actual practical application of the github service and what about copyright?

  1. What is the logic of putting your code on public display, so that it is copied and then sold? Or are there real things that carry material value are not laid out? Or there is something like: oh look, I wrote a new super-audio player, swing to health and use. Or the service is half commercial, such as here are limited versions of the code, you can use it, and if you want something normal, buy a license?

  2. And what is meant by the copyright on GitHub-e, and indeed in principle. The layout of the site (the blocks themselves, the location), if copied (except for design) - is this considered copyright infringement? With the design it is clear if the layout is one to one - it seems to be a violation of copyright. And by the way, the design itself is in essence fashioned from different photos, often with people's faces - where do the designers themselves take it all, stupidly download someone else's photos from the Internet?

  3. If you take a code with a CMS type functional, is it also a copyright violation? Maybe I don’t understand something, but the principle of CMS is about the same, generating static pages, a directory and other interactions? Take the same Bitrix, is it something super-unique that is not publicly available? Really, for so many years of Internet development, the free high-quality analog of paid CMS did not appear on the Internet?

  • five
    1) I like sharing with people, I'm not greedy for money. By the way, it is possible to prohibit selling with a license (and with a code without a specified license, you cannot do anything at all under the laws of all countries); 2) What copyrights are and what they apply to - read in the laws of the United States and your country of residence, the github has nothing to do with it; 3) The same, it is all governed by laws, not a githabb - andreymal
  • 2
    To describe the rights to the code, the LICENSE file is used, in which it indicates the license / licenses to use. If you are so concerned about commercial use, simply distribute the code for free under a license prohibiting commercial use, and sell it with another license (commercial). - etki

1 answer 1

What is the logic of putting your code on public display, so that it is copied and then sold?

  1. There is such a thing as free software. This is when you upload your code under a free license, and in return receive a community (in fact, free programmers, testers, documentation authors and a multi-disciplinary support service on a voluntary basis, motivated solely by interest in your product).

  2. This approach, by the way, is applicable in business. In this case, the developer earns by selling not the product (platform) itself, but a kind of premium services to it (additional modules, extended support, integration assistance, etc.). In this case, copying the code will not bring any harm - anyway, the income directly from it is zero.

  3. Companies can also upload their old products that have lost commercial value.

Or are there real things that carry material value are not laid out?

Here are a couple of examples of products that live and live with this business model:

These things are real and bring income to their own companies.

I can’t say anything about web frameworks - not my area.

Or the service is half commercial, such as here are limited versions of the code, you can use it, and if you want something normal, buy a license?

Source codes of a product are laid out in a repository, therefore about any trial version of speech cannot go.

And what is meant by the copyright on GitHub-e, and indeed in principle.

What is spelled out in local copyright laws. I will quote my old answer to a related topic:

... if you plan to distribute the program in countries that have adopted the Bern Convention (among which are the Russian Federation and the United States).

  1. Mention of authorship is the realization of the right to authorship relating to non-exclusive rights.

  2. A license mention is an indication of the conditions under which a copy of the library was given to you. The fact is that nothing prevents the author from distributing the same library under different licenses to different people and enterprises.

Accordingly, with further distribution (if the license permits it), you will not only have to give users the conditions and permissions, but also indicate that this distribution itself is legal at all.

The layout of the site (the blocks themselves, the location), if copied (except for design) - is this considered copyright infringement? With the design it is clear if the layout is one to one - it seems to be a violation of copyright.

There is a very fine line - you need to contact a lawyer.

And by the way, the design itself is in essence fashioned from different photos, often with people's faces - where do the designers themselves take it all, stupidly download someone else's photos from the Internet?

By the way, yes, buying a layout, you have the right to request copies of all licensing agreements of the designer of this layout with the authors of photos or photobanks.

If you take a code with a CMS type functional, is it also a copyright violation?

Depends on the license (license agreement) under which this code was distributed. If she allows it, then no, it is not.

Maybe I don’t understand something, but the principle of CMS is about the same, generating static pages, a directory and other interactions? Take the same Bitrix, is it something super-unique that is not publicly available? Really, for so many years of Internet development, the free high-quality analog of paid CMS did not appear on the Internet?

On the one hand, this generation can be done in different ways. But, on the other hand, there is a bad precedent of litigation between Oracle and Google over nine lines of code . So with this, again, only to a lawyer.