NOTICE: Copyright removed on a hosting site.

[Oldiesmann]

Their copyright is displayed on all of the sites they designed, regardless of whether there's an SMF forum there or not. As I said, one of the site they designed is using SMF with a valid copyright, so that really doesn't indicate that they're responsible for the copyright removal.

[digger]

Is this SMF? http://tinyurl.com/m6lr38

Yes. Appears to be integrated with Joomla. Will contact them when I get home from work tonight.

Why SMF installation script don't show text of license agreement? Many people have SMF installed and don't know anything about license.

[Arantor]

digger: It's on the download page.

Before downloading any of the packages listed below, please read the license. It has important agreements in it.

By downloading and installing the software, you signify that you agree to this license.

If you are not sure which package you want there is an explanation of the file types available.

[DSfirerescue]

http://proboards.com/ [nofollow]

They have SMF forums for free, to host. But they do not provide ANY copyright for Simple Machines. I don't know whether this is in the right section but I wanted to let you know.

For example, take this board:
http://newarkmod.proboards.com/ [nofollow]

Also, if it isn't an SM Forum, it is not my fault because if you look at a topic, it is clearly exactly the same as SM.

Please take action.

They do have similarities, although smf is far more advanced than pro boards. 

For example, on proboards everybody can see the admin boards.  They can't post nor view posts, but they can see the board which I find to not be very good.

[[SAP]Francis]

http://proboards.com/

They have SMF forums for free, to host. But they do not provide ANY copyright for Simple Machines. I don't know whether this is in the right section but I wanted to let you know.

For example, take this board:
http://newarkmod.proboards.com/

Also, if it isn't an SM Forum, it is not my fault because if you look at a topic, it is clearly exactly the same as SM.

Please take action.

They do have similarities, although smf is far more advanced than pro boards. 

For example, on proboards everybody can see the admin boards.  They can't post nor view posts, but they can see the board which I find to not be very good.

The owners wanted it that way, Net1hosting.

[Arantor]

And you can mod SMF for that too if you like.

[DSfirerescue]

http://proboards.com/ [nofollow]

They have SMF forums for free, to host. But they do not provide ANY copyright for Simple Machines. I don't know whether this is in the right section but I wanted to let you know.

For example, take this board:
http://newarkmod.proboards.com/ [nofollow]

Also, if it isn't an SM Forum, it is not my fault because if you look at a topic, it is clearly exactly the same as SM.

Please take action.

They do have similarities, although smf is far more advanced than pro boards. 

For example, on proboards everybody can see the admin boards.  They can't post nor view posts, but they can see the board which I find to not be very good.

The owners wanted it that way, Net1hosting.

Yes, I am aware of that.  I personally am just not a fan of this.

[digger]

digger: It's on the download page.

Before downloading any of the packages listed below, please read the license. It has important agreements in it.

By downloading and installing the software, you signify that you agree to this license.

If you are not sure which package you want there is an explanation of the file types available.

Download page have English version only (license agreement text in English also). Not all people can read this.
And everybody can download SMF package without reading of license agreement.

[Arantor]

It's something being looked into but even if translations were available, they wouldn't necessarily be legally correct, short of paying a LOT of money to lawyers for every language to translate. Thus the English is the official language and the one that is legally binding.

[digger]

It's something being looked into but even if translations were available, they wouldn't necessarily be legally correct, short of paying a LOT of money to lawyers for every language to translate. Thus the English is the official language and the one that is legally binding.

Many non-English users don't know about the SMF license. Many of them sure that SMF have GNU license.
I saw some English users sure that SMF is GNU
Is it so hard to display license agreement text within installation process?

[Arantor]

Based on what you've just said how would it change anything? Sure you'd make them a little more aware but:
1. Users click through any old license now; how many people actually READ the license any more?
2. If they don't understand English it would just be another screen to click through.

Which users? I'm quite happy to point them out to the page on GNU.org which confirms SMF's license does not fall under the FSF's definition of free.

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

Download page have English version only (license agreement text in English also). Not all people can read this.

True, but in SM's case the English version is the legally binding one, and the license is also shipped within the package I think.

And everybody can download SMF package without reading of license agreement.

True, but it is said that by downloading you confirm to have read and understood it.
It's no less than what most software does, asking you to check a box that you've read the license and agree.

[raggi5]

Well, if it is an auto script smf version, the "welcome" post could be the license

[[SAP]Francis]

Well, if it is an auto script smf version, the "welcome" post could be the license

And they could add the license to the administration panel too.