copyright is hidden :o

[IceXaos]

I guess I missed it as well.

[Jakob Fel]

Okay, for one, can I see the link to the page that's on?

Secondly, when it says that mods may not alter or remove the copyright, that means you cannot tamper with what it says, its links, or remove it altogether. Themes alter the color of it all the time.

[aishaweb]

http://www.simplemachines.org/about/license.php

[Jakob Fel]

I didn't see a thing about what K@ said in that page. I used the browser find tool, and I read completely through it several times, and I don't see it ANYWHERE.

[kat]

So, that makes it wrong, does it?

The copyright has to be SEEN.

Otherwise, what the hell's the point of even having it?

But, as you're obviously as trusting as you seem to be trustworthy, I'll try and find the page and link to it.

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

You are correct Jake, it isn't there - even though I'm pretty sure it used to be there at one point.

[kat]

Wasn't so hard to find...

http://docs.simplemachines.org/index.php?topic=470.msg6309#msg6309

[Jakob Fel]

Okay, you have me there, but still, the OP isn't technically hiding the copyright, it just happened to come out that way after they installed this new theme. That's somewhat out of their range unless they know how to modify the CSS.

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

Wasn't so hard to find...

http://docs.simplemachines.org/index.php?topic=470.msg6309#msg6309

That however is an article not part of the copyright agreement, and the user can not be bound by that article.

[Jakob Fel]

Ahh, true! Anyways, I looked at the OP's site again, and I can still see it, it just takes a double-take sometimes.

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

One thing I do have to mention here is, that I wouldn't want to hide the copyright statement myself - and I wouldn't support someone who did, and most probably the team wouldn't either. It would also be polite to keep it visible when you can, of course if a theme messed it up for you, you can't really be held responsible...

[kat]

That's somewhat out of their range unless they know how to modify the CSS.

That's what we're here for...

[Jakob Fel]

Eh, true, but like Arma said, since it isn't in the agreement, they can't be legally forced to do so.

[kat]

Depends on how the legalheads interpret "visible", I guess.

[Kindred]

Jake.

Quit being a git.

The copyright must be present and visible.
If we felt like taking ti to court, the court would side with us, if someone attempted to use your excuse, because if it's hidden, it is not technically present...

[Jakob Fel]

Jake.

Quit being a git.

First off, I don't like that comment. Secondly, it doesn't make any sense. If you want it to be legally enforceable, you would need to put it in the license agreement, instead of JUST a doc file. It IS present on his site, and it's just a little difficult to see. No disrespect intended.

[kat]

It's displayed, when you install SMF, in the first place.

IIRC, you even have to agree to it, before you proceed with the install.

license.txt

[Jakob Fel]

I don't see it anywhere in license.txt.

[kat]

Agreement
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Permission is hereby granted to use, copy, modify and/or distribute this Package, provided that:
   a. All copyright notices within source files and as generated by the Software as output are retained, unchanged.

Although, as is typical with legalese, it seems self-defeating, in a way.

It COULD be argued that editing it, to make it visible if you add a theme, isn't allowed.

Thing is, by adding a theme that makes it invisible, you're "modifying" the software. They'll get you, on that, I suspect.

[Jakob Fel]

What the license states is that the user isn't allowed to modify it, meaning that they can't change the links or what the copyright notice says. Unless the OP designed his theme on his own, it isn't HIS fault that the copyright notice isn't extremely easy to see. It is there, you can see it, so technically it isn't breaking any agreements or infringing the license.