Does "open-source" translate to "anyone can take my work and host it wherever and however they like"?

Answer 1

Your content is copyrighted and you are within your rights to demand they take it down.

You are offering use of your source code, which is your copyrighted work, under the terms of the GNU LGPL. Your product descriptions, screenshots etc. are not covered by this license. The license states

(1) we copyright the library, and (2) we offer you this license, which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the library.

So they have copied your work under this license, but the terms of the license state that the license must be included without modification. From your description of the site it appears that this is not the case, therefore they have violated the license and thus have no right to distribute your copyrighted work. They also have no license to copy your product descriptions, documentation and screenshots, although it may be argued that changelogs form part of the source code.

Answer 2

Open Source means that you grant broad freedoms to the use of the source code you wrote. Licenses differ, but often it means just that. Someone can take your work and do whatever they want with it.

It's often considered in poor taste to take someone else's work and claim it is yours. (Not to mention illegal for most open source licenses.) People often announce where and why they are forking a code base. However, no one needs to ask your permission, or even tell you what they are doing, as long as they don't relicense the code. That is part of the freedom you grant by putting your work under an open source license.

Most open source licenses require that the original copyright is maintained, even on derivative works, so that is one protection you have against "theft" of credit for the hard work you put into your software.

Answer 3

Yes, anyone can host it. Look at all the places you can get versions of GCC, for example - there must be thousands! But when it comes to the license, changing that is typically not allowed, so if the copied site tries to use a different license from the one you used originally (particularly if this is one of the GNU licenses), then you have grounds for complaint. In this case, your best bet it to explain to the copiers that your code is LGPL and that license cannot be changed, and if this fails, contact their ISP.

Answer 4

In practice - yes.

As long as you publish it - people will be using and abusing it all the way they can.

Someone will need your project.

Someone else will need you project as just one more item to fill up their download-site.

Answer 5

No, but let me qualify that based on comments. While generally speaking, anyone can host it, most licenses don't allow for modification without the author's consent. And in the absence of you relinquishing those rights, from everything I've read, you retain them.

"Open source" means (generally) that people can view and edit the source for themselves. It's a broad term, and AFAIK not of any legal precision, but IANAL. From what I've read, there is a body out there called the Open Source Initiative, and they put their seal of approval on a number of licenses that adhere to their core principles. It's the license you distribute your source and your program under that matters. Open Source does NOT mean that your code is in the "public domain". You still own the copyright to it.

You should determine what your license terms should be, and then choose a hosting provider that's compatible with what you want, not the other way around (which I think is why you're having some problems...)

Edit: I know some people are all hot n' bothered about my use of the term "open source", but my answer was regarding the use of the term in the common vernacular. It's like saying "I'm a good housekeeper" vs "I have the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval".

Answer 6

Actually, this has nothing to do with open source. You could simply be a freeware / shareware developer, and the story would be the same. I guess it has more to do with the way Softpedia (and that other site) "siphoned" your page to host your app.

Concerning asking them to remove it, you can't really do that. One of the freedom of the (L)GPL is the right to redistribute. It does come with a few constraints though: it has to be redistributed using the same license (here "freeware" might not be enough), and if I'm not mistaken, they have to provide the source too if they redistribute it.

Also, on choice of license, it looks like your program is just an app, not library or a component, so you'd be better off with the GPL instead of the LGPL, which is meant for open source libraries that can be used in proprietary software (as long as the libraries themselves aren't modified).

Answer 7

Yes, it means exactly that.

In using the LGPL, you are essentially giving up your control over the source code in exchange for everyone else agreeing to not control it either. That's pretty much the whole idea behind Free Software.

Now what they can't do is change the copyright or license. Anyone tempted to do something shady like shadow-mirroring your site, may be tempted to go a little further and replace your name in the copyright, or even change the terms. If they do that, you have them.

Also, they cannot legally copy all the text off your website. That stuff is copyrighted too, and most folks don't put an open license on it anywhere.

Answer 8

Welcome as a software developer.

This is not only fairly commen, but i would be suppriced this has not happend before. I write many programs and this happens all the time. I personaly like Softpedia their one of the most hones once of these kind of sites ( I get a ton of emails with that they will promote my product if only i link to them or try to trick users into paying for downloading.

I think at the end of the day you have to look at it like a positive thing, it gives your product ( even if its free, i assume you want the most amount of users posible to help them and improve your coding skills) more users. One of the ways for you to drive traffic towards your site a built in automatic update that goes to your site or online documentation that you link to inside your application.

To come back to the automatic update thing i think its very importent, as more and more sites will host your product they will host a old version and your users will see a old and worse version of your product. Then a automatic update system will tell the users at once they can update to version XXX.

I would also recommend that you visit: http://www.asp-shareware.org/pad/ that will give you some control over how your product gets displayed on 3d party sites.

Answer 9

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that it depends upon the license that you are using. If you release your copyright to the code then there might not be much you an do in regards to the code itself. However, if you are just saying that anyone may simply view the code then you may be able to demand that it is removed from their site.

However, all of the additional information associated with the code may or may not be covered by the same license that is on the code. You might need to double check the original website, but if you don't have some notice saying that your copyright on the additional information has been released, they shouldn't be able to take all of it without your permission. If that is the case you should be able to go after them to remove all information supplementary to the source code itself.

My understanding of the open source license has always been that making the code itself open source doesn't mean that all work you do for that software is now under that same license as well. For example, say I write an application and release it free and open source. I would still be within my rights to separate write and extensive user's manual for the application and I would be able to sell that independent of the software and even go so far as to include the software with the book. As long as you could also download the software without buying the book there wouldn't be a conflict with most of the free and open source licenses.

Answer 10

"Am I missing the mark in being annoyed at all?"

If the license you released your software under explicitly permits what you're annoyed at (and most Open Source licenses like the GPL, BSD, MIT do), then yes you are REALLY missing the mark.

Answer 11

GNU Affero General Public License is defined for web services.

Answer 12

It depends on the wording of the license and how many lawyers you have standing behind you.

Answer 13

Playing a little devil's advocate here.

They probably do not think there are doing anything wrong, but rather helping your program to reach a bigger audience. As for downloading your screenshots etc, they probably consider the software to be the major work and hence if you are willing to give that away for free , then you won't mind the screenshorts etc.

I know I have on several occasions come across a listing of a shareware / freeware / open source program that sounds like it would do what I want, and when I go to download it, I can't access it because the website has disappeared. At this stage, I would have wanted the listing website had hosted the files themselves rather than just linking to the original site.

One example is ListXP listed at http://softwaregadgets.gridspace.net/archives/2006/01/entry_6.html

Also, I find it a little strange you are 'most upset' at them using your name. Would you not be more upset if they had used your program without acknowledging you?

Answer 14

The LGPL does not require the copier to give credit, other than including the original copyright assertion and license text that came with your code. You did follow the instructions right? For anyone looking at the source this should be enough to discover that you are the author.

What you actually want is a license with something like the obnoxious BSD advertising clause:

All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by John Doe.

Such a clause is not a good idea for the reasons mentioned in the linked article.

Answer 15

I'm no lawyer but your verbatim product descriptiong might still be your intellectual property even when put the product itself under an open source license.