It'd only apply to the parts of the XOOPS source code you've used, AND if the XOOPS developers chose to release that code under the terms of the GPL v3. The developers are free to do so, but will have to do so explicitly.

Herko

xoops.org isn't run on a shared hosting account, but on a dedicated server with large bandwidth quota's, so comparing xoops.org (+- 10.000 unique visitors/day) with your website won't help you here.

I'm with surpasshosting too, as will xoops.org when it moves to their new (dedicated) servers, and they know how XOOPS works. So if they say its your unique visitors, go into your cpanel, to web/ftp stats and use your favorite statistics application (I like awstats best) to see how many unique visitors you really have, as the XOOPS who is online block isn't a decent indication of that.

Herko

david removed some of his posts himself, afaik (could be wrong tho), so don't blame the mods just yet...

Herko

Quote:
I believe there's about 700 bots that are being blocked at the server level...

Herko

script_fu wrote:
Quote:
EPC USA, where the webservers owned by the Foundation are currently hosted, will take care of that, which is very nice of them. They'll make sure the DNS will resolve to the new servers at Surpass Hosting.

@draj: xoops.com is a privately owned domain that is being redirected to the XOOPS project website as a favor to the XOOPS project and community. Nothing happens on that domain. So any violation of any law that happens here on xoops.org is MyWeb Japan's problem, not mine personally. We were discussing the ownership of THIS website, which is xoops.ORG, nor xoops.COM. Get your facts straight And off my case, while you're at it. I don't need to prove anything to the community anymore, I've done my share of the good and bad.

XOOPS.net btw is for sale. Not from me, but from a domain auction service or something.

As for trademark law and xoops.org, the Foundation owns the trademark rights for the name XOOPS in a large part of the planet (EU, USA, China etc.), except for Japan, where Bownet Sustems KK (not MyWeb Japan) already owns the trademark rights to the name XOOPS. But owning trademark rights isn't the same as owning all domain names related to that trademark. Nor is that necessary, the goal of the XOOPS Foundation (or the project for that matter) isn't to control and own the XOOPSiverse, but to ensure structural and continued open source development of the XOOPS system, and community participation in support, development, documentation, marketing etc.
Somebody else owning a domain name related to XOOPS (like xoops.be, or xoops.info, or xoops.us, or xoops.whatever?) doesn't present a problem, so long as the owners do not use the name XOOPS to damage the XOOPS project, brand or its community. Also, it's up to the Foundation Board to decide whether or not legal action is taken against any violation of the trademark, and that decision needs to be weighed by the amount of damage done versus the amount of resources needed to stop the violation for instance. It being legally possible doesn't mean the Foundation is obligated to act.

This is my last post on this point, as for me the position is crystal clear:
1. XOOPS.org is owned by MyWeb Japan, owned by Kazumi Ono. He graciously allows the XOOPS project to use the domain -for free, I might add! At technical level DNS can be arranged, but the XOOPS project has no control over the domain itself.
2. XOOPS.com is owned by me personally, and is redirected to xoops.org as a favor to the XOOPS project and community.
3. The Foundation owns many XOOPS related domains -such as the xoopsinfo domains, as well as most of the international trademark rights for the name XOOPS. The one exception being Japan, where Bownet Sustems KK owns the trademark rights.
4. The Foundation Board decides whether or not to take legal action against violations of the trademark rights.

Herko

Quote:
Agreed, but that's a funny thing: despite about 15 serious attempts to get in touch with the current registrant of the xoops.org domain -onokazu who started the XOOPS project with a few enthusiastic people and who now is a leading part of the XOOPS Cube project- the XOOPS Foundation hasn't been able to arrange the transfer of the domain to the Foundation as to secure it for the XOOPS project and its community. All attempts made by several members of the Foundation Board have been stoically ignored, even if the e-mails have been read and the read notification have been recieved by us. So the request hasn't been actively denied, just ignored. This is a fact, not any type of judgement. The Foundation really wants the transfer tho.

Quote:
Not the Foundation, but Kazumi Ono would be legally responsible then, for everything that happens on the xoops.org domain.

As chairman of teh FOundation I'd take on the responsibility if the need arises.

Herko

I'm not involved in any part of the XOOPS project except the Foundation, so I can't shed any light on which site should be used for what purpose and whatnot, but as I personally transferred the ownership and control of the xoopsinfo domain (read: not the website itself!) to the Foundation, as a generous donation from James Morris to the XOOPS Community, I can say that that part is true.

Herko

Marcan, you picked a fine day to get married! COngratulations my friend!

Herko

Quote:

This will not be within 4 weeks time, but as soon as possible afterwards. There are new boardmembers of the Foundation to be processed (marcan, davidl2 and phppp), and then there'll be a year meeting in which last years year report needs to be approved and officialsed. Only then are we allowed to post it.

Herko

The GPL open source license states that the copyright holder grants any and all users the non-revocable, everlasting right to use the released code as they see fit, as long as the users apply these terms to the same code and its derivative works.

So, does anyone have a copy of the modules? *I* for one think they're very good, and think that MacNaz has done XOOPS a great service by releasing them, whatever his feelings towards XOOPS.org may be now. I thank him for releasing his code too, and will always credit him for his work.

But the modules are out there, and they're here to stay. Notice or no notice, but this clearly isn't a violation of copyrights. If you disagree, take the XOOPS Foundation to court over this, and lets find out who is right (this is not a threat, nor a call for 'civil unrest', but a proposal to get this settled one way or another).

Herko