28 replies to this topic

[noname1981]

I know someone who's reselling osCommerce by providing service to set up an eCommerce website using osCommerce to their clients. I'm curious if this is in breach of osCommerce copyright. Can they do this?

[DunWeb]

I currently sell OsCommerce websites. I do not charge for the OsCommerce software, but I do charge for my time to configure my customers site. Having said that, if the person that you are speaking about configures the site in anyway, than I don't think that person is breaking any laws.

[burt]

Not only is it NOT illegal, you are ENCOURAGED to try to make money by selling GPL software.

[Glcustoms]

If it were illegal, you wouldnt see osCommerce as popular as it is, and there would be even more osCommerce sites echoing the famous "Lets See What We Have Here" and sporty blue look.

[noname1981]

to me, GLP software should be shared. it's fair enough to charge for the configuration but it shouldn't be a common practice, should it?
GLP's support is widely available from community. so, configuration isn't really that hard. i dunno. i'm just not comfortable with it.

[Glcustoms]

noname1981, on Jun 18 2008, 09:19 PM, said:

to me, GLP software should be shared. it's fair enough to charge for the configuration but it shouldn't be a common practice, should it?
GLP's support is widely available from community. so, configuration isn't really that hard. i dunno. i'm just not comfortable with it.

For you configuration may not be that hard, and thestock admin configuration is pretty much strait foward, but for many people who need an online shop, web design and coding are a tough battle. The software may be open source and the support may lie here, but the human that puts the software together for someone has a good chance of lingering here, searching for answers and answering questions as well. And many the same human donates contributions to the project making it what it is. If the human takes the open source software and builds it for everyone for free, then the human just may starve, while the new site owner thrives. Thats something to be uncomfortable about. None the less open source is profitable to all or it just would not be. open source software is an excellent way to boost economy worldwide, now thats a real gift we all can benifit from.

[JuanIgnacio]

I sell osCommerce sites as well. But I don't charge for the osCommerce itself. I charge for designing a templeate, applying it, setup shiping and payment methods, etc. All thiis takes a lot of time, why should I do it for free?

[kdogg]

Everyone I know who sells Os Commerce does it the same way, they sell there time.

The software is free. Any moron can download it but a lot of people don't know what to do with it so some people will offer to set it up, customize it and maintain it for a fee.

This is 100% legal. This is what your paying for when you buy OS Commerce, not the software itself but the time the person you buy it from puts into it.

[web-project]

burt, on Jun 18 2008, 08:27 AM, said:

Not only is it NOT illegal, you are ENCOURAGED to try to make money by selling GPL software.

un-modified version is illegal to sell, but if the oscommerce contains several contribution - it is legal to sell, examples are cube cart, CRE Loaded (loaded with contribution by CRE team) few other carts.

[burt]

web-project, on Oct 10 2008, 08:44 PM, said:

un-modified version is illegal to sell

Wrong.

[toyicebear]

I also do commercial installs, configuration, set-up customization of osCommerce, and as other have stated i do not charge for the software itself.

You are actually allowed to charge for distributing the software itself too. But doing so would probably land you alot of angry customers aswell as a browser warning from MaCafee (for those who have SiteAdvisor installed that is) about you selling software which is available elsewhere for free...

This is an excerpt from the GNU website:

Quote

The word “free” has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer either to freedom or to price. When we speak of “free software”, we're talking about freedom, not price. (Think of “free speech”, not “free beer”.) Specifically, it means that a user is free to run the program, change the program, and redistribute the program with or without changes.

Free programs are sometimes distributed gratis, and sometimes for a substantial price. Often the same program is available in both ways from different places. The program is free regardless of the price, because users have freedom in using it.

Read more...

Edited by toyicebear, 11 October 2008, 08:35.

[axioma]

is not illegal... you can buy "whatever" you want... but if whoever can get it for free why pay for... anyway always you can find people willing to pay, due to is lack of time, knowledge etc.

[bkellum]

I sell osC sites that I have modified or added custom code to the core base (or even loaded with freely distributed contributions). Nothing wrong with this at all.

Some store owners want to stick to "running the store" and leave template design and code work to their developer. The part that I sell is truly the service that I provide, whether that be installing a stock osC or a customized version.

I think this is a common practise and is 100% within the GPL license.

[Coopco]

Anybody want to buy the right to use the Brooklyn Bridge?

[bkellum]

Coopco, on Oct 12 2008, 08:45 AM, said:

Anybody want to buy the right to use the Brooklyn Bridge?

We call that the Toll Booth here in Chicago.

[tokki]

I'm sorry that the topic is quite old... but I can't find any new discussion about it.

Recently I found in a webcompany portfolio a lot of oscommerce websites (not stating it was "oscommerce") having the link
"powered by oscommerce" removed also in admin login screen (with "powered by <name of company>").

Is this illegal? In open source software, who has the right to "claim the ownership" toward the company? The project leader?

I asked it in another forum but they pointed me here

[ecartz]

tokki, on Jul 2 2009, 05:35 AM, said:

In open source software, who has the right to "claim the ownership" toward the company? The project leader?

It's the same as closed source. The copyright holder is the owner. In this case, that would be the project itself. The files are all copyright osCommerce. I don't know how Harald has the project ownership set up, but treating him as the owner has always seemed to work.

In terms of the legality of selling osCommerce with the Powered by osCommerce removed, the project is GPLed. The powered by osCommerce cannot be required under the advertising clause. What is required is the copyright notice. They can only remove the copyright notice from the HTML if they remove all the content under copyright (primarily the little images). They cannot remove the copyright notices from the files. They must distribute under the GPL and not another license.

Whether they are selling it or not is irrelevant. They could be giving the code away and they would still have to comply with the GPL and copyright law in general. If you really think that they are violating the osCommerce copyright, you could contact Harald, but it is unlikely that they are. They are probably minimally complying with the terms. To determine if they are, someone would have to buy a template and check the copyrights and attached license. I suspect that Harald would want to wait until someone could report to him that the templates were missing copyright and/or license before taking any action.

[tokki]

ok thanks for your reply. I haven't bought any service from them so I can't verify...
Anyway I understood how it works thank you.

Bye

[Shaydez]

I don't think its fair for people to resell osCommerce; i understand providing custom programming and custom design services and support on how to use it.. but reselling the application itself should be a huge no and a huge slap in the fast to the community that helped build it. I have worked with osCommerce since 2004 and contributed alot to the application. if someone ended selling my ideas i'm kind of insulted.

i found this company selling osCommerce to music companies. http://www.pro-activewebsites.com/

George’s Music http://georgesmusiconline.com
Chuck Levin’s Washington Music http://www.buyfromchucks.com
The Music Farm http://www.themusicfarm.com
Beatstreet Music http://www.beatstreetmusic.net

[MrPhil]

Shaydez, on 10 December 2009, 16:32, said:

I don't think its fair for people to resell osCommerce;

It may (or may not) be in accordance with osC's license to sell unmodified code. So be it. If it's permitted (selling the software itself, not just services, templates, etc.), what's the problem? If I am physically capable of cleaning my house, but choose to hire a maid or cleaning service (so I have more time to do other things), should I be ostracized? Selling unmodified osC might be a bit unethical, if the seller leads buyers to believe that he's the only source (i.e., they can't get it for free), but if a customer doesn't want to spend the time and effort to obtain a copy and is willing to pay someone else for their time, so be it. Besides, 1) there are plenty of places to bury the "price" of osC in a services contract, 2) you'll want to get a fresh copy yourself, of known vintage and provenance (maybe the customer got his copy off of Bill's Warez Site), and 3) some customers won't trust software that they don't pay good money for. Strange, but true. You actually can't tell some businesses "the software is free, I'm just charging for my time to install and configure." They'll tell you it must be a piece of crap, and they demand you buy something from Microsoft.

Quote

if someone ended selling my ideas i'm kind of insulted.

Then don't contribute to open source projects -- just sell your code.