Leet steals plugins

Why steal them if you're going to rewrite them anyway? That doesn't make any sense.

 

Are you saying if I download a public plugin I am stealing it? Oh God, I'm a huge criminal then.

 

Let's first look at the definition of stealing: To take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. Leet 'takes' another person's property, but only if the license allows it, so they have the legal right to do so. We can therefore not call it stealing, because it's not illegal. Sure thing, you may or may not like it at all, when Leet distributes your plugin, (possibly rewritten, who knows) but it's not stealing. If the license allows them to do so, they can do exactly that if they want to.

I must say, I don't like the way Leet uses plugins either, without giving any credit or just quickly asking for permission, but nobody forces them do so, unless you have a license that enforces exactly that.

I agree Leet didn't exactly... play this friendly, but it's a company after all. If you can get more money for free (basically), you get more money for free. There's nothing that stops you from doing it, if it's not illegal. If you don't want your plugins to be used for sale, there are plenty of licenses that provide that.

 

Like I said, the practice stopped months ago, before I joined. Rewriting is often necessary because of breaking changes in PocketMine and Minecraft. And sometimes full rewrites happen because the plugin is very badly coded ( for example the Factions and Logblock plugin we are currently using. ).

Also, the BoxOfDevs's Functions plugin is being removed from our servers in the following days.

 

Yes, and the "lot more than that" is them making profits
Do you think that when you go to some fast food restaurant and pay $8 for a menu, it costs them $8 to pay for their employees, the ingredients, etc? Hell no. A lot less than that. All the extra money is profits.

 

But if the developer of the software specifically picked a license that allowed commercial use, then it's completely legally & morally/ethically fine to use it for profits

 

This topic triggered me.

If you publish a project with a license allowing commercial use, then it can be used commercially so do not complain as you chose the license.

If it's true where someone has used your project's code outside of the terms of the license then I'd recommend first talking to the company directly and then filing a DMCA directly to the company (LEET). Make sure the management do get the notice, do not leave it as a Tweet.

Having a public project is not the same as having an open source project. If you do not attach a license to your project then no one else should be using your project. It's your copyrighted material.

You need to attach the license that is right for your project. I'd recommend reading this:
https://opensource.guide/legal/#which-open-source-license-is-appropriate-for-my-project
And having a look through the 'Most Popular' section from here:
https://tldrlegal.com

The thing is, most of this debate seems to be about a company (LEET) selling a service. The service they provide is not redistributing copies of your code. They are simply using the code. What is the difference between enabling factions on a server for a price and giving a certain "donator" rank access to create factions?

The open source community is built by people wanting to contribute to the community, and many businesses and individuals use many open source projects to generate a profit. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. It's not stealing. You may individually have your own set of morals which mean you would not use an open source project to turn a profit for yourself, but the ethics of the industry differ. For example, look at Hypixel and LBSG. Do you think it's wrong that they built whole server networks based on open source platforms which they did not build? (ref: Bukkit, PocketMine)

Node.js is a popular JavaScript runtime. It happens to be open source. PayPal use it, Netflix use it, Uber use it, LinkedIn use it. Is it wrong that these companies are taking Node.js and generating a profit from using it? No. People publish their projects, people use their projects in their services.

I understand that in this case you see a more direct parity between what you are creating and what is being sold- but that means jack shit. LEET are providing a service, a Minecraft game server host which is simple to use and allows people who do not know how to configure their own servers to create servers. They're then selling access (at a premium, just as all businesses do) to aspects of their service. These aspects happen to be the use of projects which are open sourced.

Take two situations:
ServerHost_A is selling a PocketMine server (an open source project) for $10 a month. It's setup for the user and completely managed. However the customer is able to access FTP and drag-n-drop plugins into the directory as they wish. They're still paying $10 for the PocketMine server to run. It doesn't cost that much to run the VPS but they set up the infrastructure it runs on and thus charge a premium. Resources are limited.

ServerHost_B is selling a PocketMine server (an open source project) for $1 a month. It's setup for the user and completely managed. The customer is able to install plugins automatically at a cost without any technical know-how. The plugins they charge for are often open source (just as PocketMine itself) and the hosting of them doesn't cost much. The infrastructure to make this product was set up by the company and thus they charge a premium. Resources are not limited.

Do you expect ServerHost_B to not turn a profit on their service? If you're so sour, why is everyone not using ServerHost_A? Is it because potentially there is a market for ServerHost_B? Yes. Do you wish you set up ServerHost_B? Probably, it's winning the race. Would you cry if someone set up a server on ServerHost_A and sold access to users for 'AdminFun', 'Factions', or whatever other plugins there are? It's the same thing, no?

The difference between the two is obvious, granted. But each company had to set up an infrastructure and charge a premium for their service. Whether they're charging for access to code routes on their service which happen to be open source is irrelevant. They're charging for the service they run. A less flexible, much more restrictive, more basic host. If you don't wish to use the host then you don't have to. If you want to set up a more flexible host then you can. If you want to set up a server with more freedom then you can.

From what I can tell, LEET is charging premium $ for their service just as they are entitled to do. If you host an open source project that allows other people to use your project commercially (even to sell in game items) then it's going to be used. If you don't allow it then what's the point of your plugin? So someone can use it for fun? Pretty much every kid who sets up a server has the intention of becoming the next Bill Gates wanting to sell their in-game perks from plugins they downloaded of a forum to top the Forbes rich list. LEET isn't charging for copies of your projects. It's charging for use of your projects. Just like a "donation" perk for in-game pets, cosmetics, or just about whatever else you can think of selling.

Are you the same (fictional) guys who sit around shouting at Samsung because they're using Google's open-source Android platform to generate a profit? Or would you prefer to buy your Samsung Edge without access to an OS?

Ever been in dire need of a cheap server host and had to pay for a new MySQL database? I've paid $5 p/M for MySQL databases from cheap web hosts over the years. Databases which are open source and didn't cost $5 to run. Guess why they sell them at that price? Because they need to generate a profit and they can. Was it wrong of them to sell them? No. Or do you think they should just hand out access to their services for free? Good thinking.

tl;dr: If you don't have a license no one can use your project at all. If you have a license allowing for commercial use then expect it to be used commercially. Stop trying to kill open source. Perhaps you should try unplugging your computer from the internet and developing in a remote cave.

 

@ThrowawayPM Hi B3.

 

@ProjectInfinity I'm not B3 or from LEET at all. As TheDeibo has said, LEET spoke to him directly and seemingly wanted to stay away from arguing here. I'm from the Bukkit community and have previously looked into the possibility of creating a more open PocketMine hosting platform (similar to MultiCraft) rivalling LEET.

I wasn't even aware LEET were coding their own plugins, I didn't read TheDeibo's post before mine before posting my comment. Now that I know that this argument is even more futile.

 

You sir/ma'am are a god.

 

Making a LEET rival really would not be very hard, as long as you know what you are doing.

 

It would take a lot of time to grow your community to where LEET is, especially since they pretty much have a monopoly over the specific market of MCPE server hosts for ppl who know nothing about technology

 

What @Thouv said.

LEET have an active community and good marketing through YouTube, forums, and even server lists. It's also very hard to break even on a server host when you're hosting few servers which makes it hard to start unless you have sufficient capital behind you.

There could be room for a more advanced host though (allowing config.yml editing, whatever phar's you want etc). Especially now they're starting to phase out Java edition in favour of the newer version of the game.

 

But tbh LEET would probably adapt to such a rival by allowing config edit and custom phars as well, and they would win the battle, since they have the stronger community

 

Complaint: Leet selling plugins without permission from plugin creator.

Problem: They don't need permission as licenses allow commercial use.

Solution: Don't add licenses, as the default GitHub license doesn't allow commercial use.

That was clear enough I think. Let's end the debate.

Thanks leet devs for coming here and expaining.


Edit: Fixed typo and specified the license (as GitHub license)

 

No.

If you do not add a license then NO ONE can use your project. What's the point of putting it on Github if you have no license? Not having a license means it's not open source. Add a license that restricts commercial use. Or just allow it so people can use it for donator perks. Make your own license. Who knows what's best. The dev of the plugin must decide when they publish their plugin.

EDIT:
As you keep editing your post, I'll clarify: again:

There is NO default Github license.
If you do not specify a license then the default COPYRIGHT LAWS apply on your project. This means no one is able to use your project unless you formalise a contract to do so (spoken word or messages to and from is likely not enough.)

READ: https://help.github.com/articles/licensing-a-repository/

 

Firstly.



Secondly. I know LEET from the inside, I was with them for a long time, I have contact with many people within it. Not all of their plugins are MIT/GPL (or equivalent that allows commercial use) and besides, LEET should compensate retroactively. It's not good enough to say "Ok it won't happen again" when you already made money off something you did have the rights to monetize.

They have the sales figures, they know when they replaced the plugin (if at all) thus retroactively compensating is super easy.

Thirdly. You seem to think everyone in here is a teenager without any clue about the legal world, that simply isn't the case.

Fourthly. What do you have to hide by making a throw away account?