![MQL5 - Language of trade strategies built-in the MetaTrader 5 client terminal](https://c.mql5.com/i/registerlandings/logo-2.png)
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I completely agree with you Artyom Trishkin and with Andrey F. Zelinsky this is a brazen boorish theft...
Ours is clumsy: we only catch even questionable involvement in decompilation.
not "clumsy" -- but "one-sided" -- catching one thing and not catching another -- a kind of one-eyed, half-blind, half-deaf Themis
Even if it doesn't say who wrote it, somebody else wrote it, not you.
And if you copyright that code, you're stealing someone else's intellectual property.
And if you put it in CodeBase, your code should be expunged and your registration taken down.
OK, so we've taken apart a certain absolute, now let's detail it:
if I took someone else's code and changed one letter, does that give me the right to change the copyright? the question is rhetorical, the answer is no.
And if I changed 10 000 lines? The question is also rhetorical, the answer is yes.
now let's measure the margin :)
how many liters may you put your copyright in the code you changed?
The posts above give an example of changes -- there's Kim's code and Vladon's code -- is there a copyright infringement there?
I'm not a judge, I can't answer that question unequivocally. After all, comments are not copyright.
Personally I leave the comments of the author in such cases, only added them with my own, if I made corrections (but I do it for myself and not to save some imaginary copyright, I call imaginary because the comments are not copyright).
If in my opinion I did not rework the code too much, I leave the copyright to the author. If the code is sufficiently (again, imho) processed, then I put my copyright, especially if changes are not only formal (naming variables, stylization, and changed the idea of code).
Now you see how shaky everything is and can't do without a specific analysis. And to waste the time of a tertiary judge, you need at least an appeal from the author about the violation of his rights.
not "clumsy" -- but "one-sided" -- catching one thing and not catching another -- a kind of one-eyed, half-blind, half-deaf Themis
Look: the customer, presumably unaware, attached to the application a decompiled indicator, and heads went flying left and right. For 10 years, Carl!
Vladon has openly appropriated the authorship of many of Igor Kim's functions. If you give a fiver for every fact at least ... ...that's... That's a life sentence.
While I was in charge of the fourth codabase, I fought it as best I could, which caused a flurry of outrage by the way.
As far as I remember, when there was a discussion, there was something about changing at least 10% of the code.
While I was in charge of the fourth kodobase, I fought it as best I could, which caused a flurry of outrage by the way.
The guys here are arguing that comments are copywriting, and therefore part of the code, which means that the same 10% includes changes to the comments :)