(2017-03-13, 12:11 PM)Tom K. Wrote: [ -> ] (2017-03-13, 04:42 AM)Lunorian Wrote: [ -> ] (2017-03-13, 01:51 AM)Ben Cousins Wrote: [ -> ] (2017-03-13, 12:48 AM)Lunorian Wrote: [ -> ] (2017-03-12, 11:55 PM)Ben Cousins Wrote: [ -> ]I disagree. We shouldn't provide support to illegal content producing sites. This is a decision those admins have made - and a decision within the SEP that I concur with 100%.
It depends on jurisdiction of whether content is illegal. In my country linking to copyrighted content is 100% legal.
In the US and/or Australia (ironically, where I live); it isn't legal - hence my comments.
It's not illegal to link to copyright-ed content in the United States yet. If so sites such as Reddit would be liable everytime someone posted a link to a site hosting content that potentially violated copyright law. My legal advisors and copyright law experts whom I've spoken with agree with me. I can't comment on Australia as I'm not familiar with their laws.
Quote:-snip-
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_...of_America
The above is a good read which gives more context 
I'm sorry but that article has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. That article refers to linking to content which is copyrighted, which is protected. It does not have anything to do with linking to illegal distribution of copyright material - which IS illegal in the USA. Deep/inline linking protection protects search engines, like Google, who link to web pages. It stops someone suing Google because Google indexed their site and linked their homepage. Without that protection search engines would not exist.
Linking to illegally distributed content - often termed Warez - is absolutely illegal in the USA. Many people have been prosecuted for it there. The reason it exists on places like reddit is because reddit complies with the DMCA, and removes it when asked. That doesn't, in any way, mean it's legal.
It is worth pointing out, if reddit decided they needed a MyBB forum, they would be denied support for the content their site hosts.
Provide case references then.
Secondary liability, more specifically contributory liability, is what this linking falls under. While it is not directly written into federal law its pretty reasonably established under case law.
This whole conversation is largely irrelevant to your original post though. The SEP lays out what staff deem acceptable for
staff to support. There should be no locking of threads that are from members that do not meet SEP eligibility, nor should those members be precluded from support by other members.
The SEP is written not from a legal standpoint, but also a moral one, hence why it should only apply to staff of the MyBB Group. Its a policy the staff voted on internally, and amendments are agreed by the staff. Its purpose is to provide a unified staff approach to support eligibility. It should not be enforced on anyone outside of the staff.
The notice needs to be publically visible primarily to inform infrequent users, or those who are unaware of the SEP, as to why some threads receive no staff response. IMHO, support denied members should not be precluded from making threads in support either.
When talking about an unfair system you have equated contribution to a scale of privilege - that those who contribute more are somehow exempt from certain rules. This, by definition, is an unfair system. Labrocca is a great guy, but lets not pretend he contributed so much to MyBB just so he could get support.
Edit: Incidentally, I just went through the last 600 support threads and of the 3 that are locked, 3 were incorrectly locked for SEP violation, all of which I have no reopened.
(2017-03-13, 03:52 PM)Tom K. Wrote: [ -> ]Secondary liability, more specifically contributory liability, is what this linking falls under. While it is not directly written into federal law its pretty reasonably established under case law.
This whole conversation is largely irrelevant to your original post though. The SEP lays out what staff deem acceptable for staff to support. There should be no locking of threads that are from members that do not meet SEP eligibility, nor should those members be precluded from support by other members.
The SEP is written not from a legal standpoint, but also a moral one, hence why it should only apply to staff of the MyBB Group. Its a policy the staff voted on internally, and amendments are agreed by the staff. Its purpose is to provide a unified staff approach to support eligibility. It should not be enforced on anyone outside of the staff.
The notice needs to be publically visible primarily to inform infrequent users, or those who are unaware of the SEP, as to why some threads receive no staff response. IMHO, support denied members should not be precluded from making threads in support either.
When talking about an unfair system you have equated contribution to a scale of privilege - that those who contribute more are somehow exempt from certain rules. This, by definition, is an unfair system. Labrocca is a great guy, but lets not pretend he contributed so much to MyBB just so he could get support.
Edit: Incidentally, I just went through the last 600 support threads and of the 3 that are locked, 3 were incorrectly locked for SEP violation, all of which I have no reopened.
If you are denied support, you can't open a thread in the support section, so you don't even have a chance of getting feedback from other users.
I strongly disagree with whole SEP thing.... if one wants to remove backlink to MyBB than (s)he is allowed to do it. Its not illegal. But pointing that out to the whole community may be something one find 'offensive' and may do not wish everyone know it.
Of course it isn't illegal, but that's not the point. If the user won't support us then we won't support them, simple as that. They are free to get support elsewhere, they are free to use the software.
(2017-09-16, 01:07 PM)Tom K. Wrote: [ -> ]Of course it isn't illegal, but that's not the point. If the user won't support us then we won't support them, simple as that. They are free to get support elsewhere, they are free to use the software.
Not really....
If user decides to go with your product (regardless of free or paid), than you
are legally required to support them. Otherwise, you become a crimial and should be penalised. EOT.
(2017-09-16, 01:34 PM)devs Wrote: [ -> ]If user decides to go with your product (regardless of free or paid), than you are legally required to support them. Otherwise, you become a crimial and should be penalised. EOT.
For me this is enough. I'm closing this thread. If someone else wants to reopen it, fine, but this is a waste of time and, frankly there isn't enough time to go around as it is.
(2017-09-16, 01:34 PM)devs Wrote: [ -> ] (2017-09-16, 01:07 PM)Tom K. Wrote: [ -> ]Of course it isn't illegal, but that's not the point. If the user won't support us then we won't support them, simple as that. They are free to get support elsewhere, they are free to use the software.
Not really....
If user decides to go with your product (regardless of free or paid), than you are legally required to support them. Otherwise, you become a crimial and should be penalised. EOT.
While I agree this thread should be closed, let me interject this.
We are NOT legally required to do anything in regards to support. When you install MyBB you waive your right to a warranty. That's part of the license agreement.