7 ms·

We developers get the credit when someone is using our code. The open source libraries usually require keeping the copyright notice at least in the source file.

We developers get the credit when someone is using our code. The open source libraries usually require keeping the copyright notice at least in the source file. Anyone looking at the code will know who wrote it. Putting myself in the shoes of the Layervault people, I can understand that it's very hard to accept that someone is presenting as his own work something that it took me years to arrive to via iteration. Remember also the rage of Steve Jobs when he called Android a rip-off and of Dustin Curtis when people started copying the Svbtle designs. In all cases, I think the copyright law is not on their side, and perhaps not even any ethic law, but I can understand why they are pissed.

resu_nimda 14y ago
Yeah, except (almost) nobody looks at the code. In both cases (designer and developer), most people just see the end result. In other words, I don't think Layervault would feel any different if there was a comment in the HTML giving them attribution.
- packetbeats 14y ago
  Usually the developers creating open source libraries benefit from the popularity of their projects. The more people using their code, the more well known they are. If nothing else, they feel proud when their software is downloaded N thousands times. In this case, Layervault can expect hundreds of sites to show up around the web looking just like their own. Regarding the comment in the HTML, you are right, it won't make them feel better, because the design really is meant to look at. It doesn't matter how clever the source code is. That's the disadvantage the designers have, I was just saying I can understand them.
etchalon 14y ago
Basically, this. As a developer, I get to _chose_ how someone uses my code. I can release my code, and attach one of any number of licenses, which give another developer _permission_ to use my code, while laying out restrictions. If that license is violated, there is a legal recourse for me (and one which is used quite often to enforce things like the GPL, etc.) Within the development community, this is the accepted protocol for how you "borrow" code from another developer. Violating this protocol is pretty much universally reviled. But the same universal revulsion doesn't exist for design. Unless you literally copy and paste someone's actual file. And I think that's where the disconnect comes from. In development, the hard work is in the typing, not the idea, really. If I see an animation effect I like, or a feature from a competitor's product, there's still a massive effort I have to undertake to recreate it. The "work" in development is in the work itself, not in the idea. Obviously there are cases where this isn't true. Novel design patterns, component compositions, etc. exist. But I'm going for an 80/20 discussion here. In design, the work itself is generally secondary to all the upfront effort work of the "idea". A designer will throw away a dozen, if not more, failed attempts at an idea. Minor things like color, shape, typeface, will be iterated on over and over again, until something takes form that looks "correct". Once they've reached that climax though, the actually complexity of the end product might be minimal. Recreating all of that designer's choices is beyond simple, so long as you have the software. Even if you don't literally trace their image, all of the "work" has been done for you.

resu_nimda 14y ago

Yeah, except (almost) nobody looks at the code. In both cases (designer and developer), most people just see the end result. In other words, I don't think Layervault would feel any different if there was a comment in the HTML giving them attribution.

packetbeats 14y ago
Usually the developers creating open source libraries benefit from the popularity of their projects. The more people using their code, the more well known they are. If nothing else, they feel proud when their software is downloaded N thousands times. In this case, Layervault can expect hundreds of sites to show up around the web looking just like their own. Regarding the comment in the HTML, you are right, it won't make them feel better, because the design really is meant to look at. It doesn't matter how clever the source code is. That's the disadvantage the designers have, I was just saying I can understand them.

etchalon 14y ago

Basically, this. As a developer, I get to _chose_ how someone uses my code. I can release my code, and attach one of any number of licenses, which give another developer _permission_ to use my code, while laying out restrictions. If that license is violated, there is a legal recourse for me (and one which is used quite often to enforce things like the GPL, etc.) Within the development community, this is the accepted protocol for how you "borrow" code from another developer. Violating this protocol is pretty much universally reviled. But the same universal revulsion doesn't exist for design. Unless you literally copy and paste someone's actual file. And I think that's where the disconnect comes from. In development, the hard work is in the typing, not the idea, really. If I see an animation effect I like, or a feature from a competitor's product, there's still a massive effort I have to undertake to recreate it. The "work" in development is in the work itself, not in the idea. Obviously there are cases where this isn't true. Novel design patterns, component compositions, etc. exist. But I'm going for an 80/20 discussion here. In design, the work itself is generally secondary to all the upfront effort work of the "idea". A designer will throw away a dozen, if not more, failed attempts at an idea. Minor things like color, shape, typeface, will be iterated on over and over again, until something takes form that looks "correct". Once they've reached that climax though, the actually complexity of the end product might be minimal. Recreating all of that designer's choices is beyond simple, so long as you have the software. Even if you don't literally trace their image, all of the "work" has been done for you.