Ethical and legal question about CSS and JS codes.

[Anonymous]

Is there anything wrong with copying someone’s code and using it on my own server as long as I leave their ownership/copyright information in the coding? The reason I ask is that I’m concerned that someone’s site may tank, or the links to their scripts might change and if I simply put a source code linking to theirs, I might have problems down the pike. If the codes are on my server, I have better control.

Doing the right thing is very important to me, so I’d appreciate input.

Best to All.

[chrisburton]

We’ve seen this type of question on this forum many many times. If you have to ask this question, I think you already know the ethical implications. What it appears is that you’re really looking for is someone to say that it’s OK.

Now on to the question of the law. There is no current statute that protects CSS under the copyright law. However, CSS has been contested in the courts (look up Trade Dress). Javascript is protected under the copyright law.

Notice: I am speaking in regards to U.S. law. Check your country’s copyright law if you live outside of the states.

[Anonymous]

What you’re really looking for is someone to say that it’s OK.

No, what I’m looking for is what I asked. It would be much easier to simply link to the scripts instead of copying them and creating them on my server. If I wee dishonest as you imply, I wouldn’t care what others think and would just do what I want. I certainly wouldn’t give credit to the creators of the script either.

Copyright laws aren’t consistent Internationally, so I’m more interested in ethics as that covers things better, in my opinion, than the so called law, especially in the U.S.

Since your opinion is that it is wrong, when someone gives a demo on their page of a function one likes, and you want to modify the colors, or something else, how is that done without copying it, altering it, and saving it on your own server. The answer is you can’t.

[chrisburton]

Copyright laws aren’t consistent Internationally, so I’m more interested in ethics as that covers things better

Correct, they are not consistent. However, ethics are not consistent either.

No, what I’m looking for is what I asked. It would be much easier to simply link to the scripts instead of copying them and creating them on my server.

That would be hotlinking and could be tracked by the source, just so you’re aware.

I think you need to be more specific with your question. If you’re talking about creating demos, ethically I don’t see an issue with this but again, ethical behavior can be subjective. While I may think it’s OK someone else could disagree. I find the best approach is to ask the source when you run into these types of questions.

[Anonymous]

Chris,

My ethics are consistent. I know how much time and effort goes into creating something. I’ve had things stolen from me online and have had others claim it as their work. I was raised by my Grandparents and look at things differently than many.

Here’s an example of something I find useful (if I can ever figure out how it works). In order to customize it for my needs I would need to make some changes to the code. I’m trying to back engineer it from the linked page to understand how it works. In the source code there links to the css and js. Not all would need to be modified as some are just basic function. My question is is it alright to modify the code and use it as long as I give the creator – James Florentino – of the code credit withing the code? Not all of the codes are credited and appear generic, but those that are I want to recognize the person(s) who created the original coding, if it’s alright to alter and use the coding in this example.

[chrisburton]

My ethics are consistent. I know how much time and effort goes into creating something. I’ve had things stolen from me online and have had others claim it as their work. I was raised by my Grandparents and look at things differently than many.

That’s not the point! I understand your sincerity but ethics are subjective. Not everyone believes what you believe.

Here’s an example of something I find useful (if I can ever figure out how it works). In order to customize it for my needs I would need to make some changes to the code. I’m trying to back engineer it from the linked page to understand how it works. In the source code there links to the css and js. Not all would need to be modified as some are just basic function. My question is is it alright to modify the code and use it as long as I give the creator – James Florentino – of the code credit withing the code? Not all of the codes are credited and appear generic, but those that are I want to recognize the person(s) who created the original coding, if it’s alright to alter and use the coding in this example.

This question could have been avoided altogether if you would just read the license terms. Scroll all the way down to “released under MIT License”. It is important to read this so you have an understanding of what the MIT license consists of in case you run into this issue again.

I’m honestly not trying to come off as arrogant or condescending. I see this same issue come up relative to font licenses. Many people don’t know about the terms but if they had, these questions could be avoided and more importantly, save them time. That’s what I’m trying to do here, save you time in the future.

[Anonymous]

….ethics are subjective.

Not hardly or mankind couldn’t have universal laws. It’s ethically wrong to murder, rob, rape, etc. These aren’t subjective.

I didn’t look at the “released under MIT License” because I generally see “Licensing agreement” which is what I was looking for.

I’m honestly not trying to come off as arrogant or condescending.

No need to apologize. I’ve dealt with many types of people in my lifetime and have grown a pretty thick skin. Those who genuinely are arrogant or condescending have a mental or emotional flaw, so I feel sorry for them more than anything.

That’s what I’m trying to do here, save you time in the future.

I appreciate that and regret I didn’t realize there was actually a Licensing Agreement on the page. I don’t like wasting my time or that of others.

Best Regards.

[chrisburton]

Not hardly or mankind couldn’t have universal laws. It’s ethically wrong to murder, rob, rape, etc. These aren’t subjective.

Unfortunately, that is not factual. Some individuals, even societies, believe otherwise. Keep in mind ethics do not fall under one category.

I don’t like wasting my time or that of others.

Certainly no time wasted on my end. Especially if I helped you or others that see this post. If you have further questions or don’t understand a portion of the license, please feel free to ask.

[Anonymous]

Some individuals, even societies, believe otherwise.

True. Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, and John Wayne Gacy thought it was alright to murder, but legal ethics said otherwise and they went bye-bye.

Groups like Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Lehi agree that mass murder is acceptable, but again legal ethics says otherwise which is why rational people oppose them.

There are aberrations with regard to ethics as noted above, but the majority knows otherwise which is again why there are laws. Laws aren’t for those who don’t get it, they are for those who might not and to give cause for punishment for those who step outside the ethics box. Sure, laws can be made to make something unethical ethical. It’s happening everywhere now, but that doesn’t erase the fact that a wrong is a wrong.

Moral Absolutism and Consequentialism are interesting topics, but this isn’t the place for that.

Best Regards.

[chrisburton]

Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, and John Wayne Gacy thought it was alright to murder[…]

Without a doubt, they certainly knew that it was wrong. Otherwise they wouldn’t have went through great lengths to try to hide their crimes.

but this isn’t the place for that

Haha. Perhaps. I do thoroughly enjoy having conversations on these topics (I’m a pre-law student). Anyway, thanks for talking with me.

[Paulie_D]

Without a doubt, they certainly knew that it was wrong.

They knew it was against the law….but their personal morality (or sociopathy/ psycopathy) overrode that fact. To their minds, it wasn’t wrong, just illegal.

Otherwise they wouldn’t have went through great lengths to try to hide their crimes.

Punishment is always to be avoided, especially when you think you have done nothing wrong*.

*see above.

I do thoroughly enjoy having conversations on these topics

Me too.

[Anonymous]

I do thoroughly enjoy having conversations on these topics (I’m a pre-law student). Anyway, thanks for talking with me.

As do I. I loved to debate in college, and philosophy was quite enjoyable, albeit useless. (I got a BS in Mechanical Engineering, and I picked up philosophy to simply fill in my time.)

The pleasure has been mine and I wish we could continue this. I’m assuming this is too far off base however, thus my remark.

I wish you much success in your studies and in your career.

Best Regards.

[Anonymous]

Me too.

Then may we proceed with this? I posted this before seeing your post. You must have posted as I was typing.

Best Wishes.

[nixnerd]

I kind of love that this thread took the turn that it did. As a philosophy nerd, I love pondering and talking about ethics. I personally come from the school of objectivity. No matter what someone may think or feel, there is one truth that is external, objective and mind-independent. 2 + 2 = 4 whether you believe it or not.

That being said… I don’t think it’s morally wrong to copy code. However, I’ve never straight up copied code verbatim because I don’t really like other people’s code. It’s not the way I would structure it, which poses a problem for maintainability.

From a practical perspective: I think you’re better off studying the logic of HOW someone structured something and then taking the time to make your version more awesome.

As for the legality of all this… I do not know.

[chrisburton]

To their minds, it wasn’t wrong, just illegal.

You’re implying they can’t go hand in hand.

Punishment is always to be avoided, especially when you think you have done nothing wrong

That implies that they believed they had done nothing wrong which I would have to respectfully disagree in those above cases.

[Author]

Posts