Smartstore violates nopCommerce license terms!!! Let's discuss

Nephira wrote:

You should write a review in Codeplex and in their English and German forums, so other people are alerted of what kind of guys they are dealing with

Nephira wrote:

SmartStore almost is NopCommerce. Download nopCommerce for FREE, use it for FREE (apart of "Powered by NopCommerce" label which you have to remove just paying some fee, but to far not $800), get some FREE help from community, and pay only if you need commercial/freelance help/specific plugins and only when you really need it.

We successfully run quite big business on NopCommerce, but for my company it costs 2 developers and dedicated server, which is not cheap at all but there is no other costs for a while. Yes, NopCommerce is limited in some ways and can't cope itself with several things when you need quite specific things, but we are happy to use NopCommerce as a base for you e-shop and telling thanks a lot for NopCommerce for a job they've done. It's very impressive.

Pretty sure NopCommerce team and community can provide you necessary help to migrate to the NopCommerce.

So. Welcome to the NopCommerce.

FYI
I found this posts in smartstore German forum (Google translation):

Suddenly new indication SmartStore on the store page
Hello!
 
I just found that "2014 Online Commerce by SmartStore AG ©" stands on each of my shop pages in the footer suddenly.
Have also seen that for some of you. Does anyone know what that means and why that was inserted? Because nopCommerce dispute? Find the somewhat strange that it is simply inserted without notice.
Alex


SmartStore Team
has absolutely nothing to do.
If you want I'll take this notice out tomorrow with you.
The best you also write a support ticket.
Greetings
 Wolfgang


Posted Yesterday, 11:43
Hello Wolfgang,
 
Thanks for the quick reply. A ticket I had opened. But probably after your business hours.
 
Please take out, because a customer was already think we were a subsidiary of Smart Goals. Right, absolute nonsense but seems to confuse some.


Hello Wolfgang,
 
please click the "Shopping Cart by SmartStore AG © 2014" also take out with us. Thank you!
Grüßle,
Marion

SmartStore Team
Hello,
the notes were removed as desired.
Greetings
Wolfgang

I found the Smartstore official statement in their blog [http://community.smartstore.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-15-offizielle-stellungnahme-der-smartstore-ag-zum-rechtsstreit-mit-nopcommerce-in-sachen-gpl/] (Google translation from the original German/English version)

SmartStore AG Official Statement in regard to the lawsuit by nopCommerce

Even if the dispute could not be finally resolved by an ordinary German court (hopefully a final determination made ​​on 7/17/2014), we would like to take this opportunity to officially to the false information published by nopCommerce via various online platforms position.

Reminder: - a derivative ie created - the SmartStore AG has the open source eCommerce application nopCommerce forked and provides it free of charge under the name SmartStore.NET available. The source code has thereby undergone significant changes, especially with regard to law capability in Germany. In addition, dozens of new features and plugins have been introduced, changes the fundamental architecture and implemented front-and backend from scratch. However, in order to nopCommerce makers do not agree and insist - in accordance with its modified GPL license - the phrase "powered by nopCommerce" to insert them again in the footer of every store page. Because for the removal of this album royalties amounting to 60 USD per domain are payable directly to the nopCommerce Ltd.. must be paid.

In the current debate, it is therefore essentially a question of whether one placed under the GPL open source software is absolutely free of charge, or whether they can be placed under a royalty-bearing license, as described by nopCommerce Ltd.. practiced. To illustrate an excerpt from a panel discussion of a user with the nopCommerce makers:

http://www.nopcommer...notice.aspx?p=1
Posted: April 30, 2012 at 1:04 PM Quote # 68611
HoosierDaddy wrote:

This is not quite right, is it? He Has 12 subdomains, but multiple stores in each subdomain. Is not a copyright rmeoval key Necessary for each store, not just each subdomain?
Everything is right, 12 keys for 12 domains.

Usually in e-commerce if you have multi-store support, each store is available on its own domain. For example, store1.mystore.com, store2.mystore.com, www.mystore.com/store3, and www.store4.com. So you can have only one installation and 4 domains / subdomains. In this case you need 4 copyright removal keys.

But if we're talking about Hezy implementation (plz note, it's not an official version), then stores are just entities in your database (information from all of them are Displayed on a single URL - http://demo.online-ex . com). In this case only one copyright removal key is required.


It is absurd and strange in the context of an open source application to speak of licenses. The GPL does something simply not to. nopCommerce but is under a GPL license. Therefore, we find it incredible, and even childish, how to behave, the makers of nopCommerce during the dispute: they respect the ongoing legal proceedings in any way and judge for yourself how they like it straight. On our CodePlex page they write, for example, with more than 50 different fake accounts (!) False reports and evaluate our software with just one point. The ratings in CodePlex serve but to judge the quality of a software. Here the "netiquette" of the community is clearly violated. We have already informed Microsoft of this fact.

These guerrilla tactics culminated recently is to harass SmartStore.NET users with the following email:

From: Your friend - [email protected]

Hi, Are you aware did SmartStore (this site is powered by it) HAS BEEN taken it court? SmartStore rejected to meet nopCommerce license terms. Users of SmartStore products might also be in violation of nopCommerce license! * For more details see https://www.nopcommerce.com/boards/t/24760/smartstore-rejected-to-meet-nopcommerce-license-terms-lets-discuss.aspx

* Emphasis by

This has been clearly demonstrated: decency is not everyone's virtue! Because what the user has to do with this matter? He does not stand in court. The attempt during an ongoing, regular process between two parties to involve uninvolved third parties, testifies - to put it kindly - not just of good manners.

Problems and core issues of the dispute

The SmartStore AG has known nopCommerce forked. The software (nopCommerce) even under the GPL (General Public License) is distributed. The General Public License is the most widely used open source software license, which end-users (individuals, organizations, corporations) the freedoms guaranteed the use of their licensed software, study, distribute (copy) to be allowed and change. The GPL has only one meaning: namely, to allow the free, viral distribution of the licensed software under it. Penalties are alien to her. For everything that could prevent the proliferation, contrary to the spirit of the GPL. That, and only that, the inventors of the GPL wanted to achieve.

At this point, however, is now pushing for questions:

Why nopCommerce is distributed simultaneously under two different licenses?
https://nopcommerce....lex.com/license (GPLv2) *
http://www.nopcommer.../licensev3.aspx (GPLv3)
This will not be covered under the GPL, either one uses GPLv2 or GPLv3. But not both simultaneously.

The GPL does not allow direct profit. Profits through an open source software are only possible in the form of services.
but nopCommerce operates a direct business model, which is connected directly to the distribution of its software. In order to place his shop without the note "powered by nopCommerce" online, you have to pay for it:

http://www.nopcommer...emoval-key.aspx
According to the terms of the license nopCommerce, you june NOT remove or hide the "Powered by nopCommerce" statement did Appears at the bottom of each page within nopCommerce shopping cart.

If you have not purchased a valid "copyright notice removal license" for nopCommerce, the copyright notice at the footer of your store must REMAIN intact, unedited and CLEARLY visible. Please do not attempt to edit, remove or hide the copyright notice in any way. It does not give you authorization to remove any copyright notices in the script source files nor any other rights. Copyright infringement is illegal - please be advised!

Upon purchase of a "copyright notice removal key" you are permitted to remove the aforementioned proprietary notices. A single key must be used for each store (URL) and june not be used more than once. Methods You may not use a key to remove copyright on unlimited store installs on one website domain.

What is your store URL? (Your license will be set for this URL). i.g. $ 50.00

Costly it is for users of the multi-store functionality; they must pay 400-1500 USD:

So We offer a wildcard copyright removal key (for multiple sites on a SINGLE domain). So if you purchase search key for domain www.yourDomain.com, then you can remove "powered by nopCommerce" on the Following sites as well - www.yourDomain.com/site1, www.yourDomain.com/site4, subdomain1.yourDomain. com. It cost $ 400 Please contact us if you're interested in purchasing of search key.

So We offer a copyright removal key server (one IP address). So if you purchase this license for IP 210 111 222 333, then you can remove "powered by nopCommerce" on all sites Which Could be Accessed using this IP address. It cost $ 1.500. Please contact us if you're interested in purchasing of search key.

This kind of form of distribution is not compatible with the licensing model of the GPL. To put an end to this very question and bustle of the makers of nopCommerce, we have the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) http://fsfe.org/ turned on. This is exclusively dedicated to the promotion of free software.

nopCommerce itself violates the GPL. It is only by using many other open source components run

Some of these components:

iTextSharp
Website: http://itextpdf.com/
License: GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL)

Telerik MVC Extensions
Website: http://www.telerik.com/help/aspnet-mvc/introduction.html
License: GPL v3.0

TinyMCE
WebSite: http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/
Copyright: Copyright © 2003-2009 Moxiecode Systems AB
License: LGPL 2.1

These components themselves are under GPL license and may only be sold under this aspect, ie, without further restriction. nopCommerce but ignored this fact and demanded money indirectly for their use without having making the necessary rights.

In order to bring the actions of the nopCommerce makers to the point:
Try the distribution of each component of the software nopCommerce or derivatives thereof to prohibit altogether.
nopCommerce itself uses every opportunity to harass her and our users for alleged copyright offenses, but itself it violates the licenses of other providers and names not even this.
The makers of nopCommerce have not understood the meaning of the GPL. The GPL requires, of course, that an author note must be included in a derivative. Although the makers of nopCommerce disregard this, we have followed it. The pecuniary remove the "Powered by nopCommerce" is no author information, but a restrictive condition that prohibits the GPLv3 at point 10.
The actions of nopCommerce maker violates the restrictive "Powered by nopCommerce" logo that is fundamentally against the basic principles of the development and distribution of open source software. In this way, open source software and in particular our SmartStore.NET project would be abused by legally dubious additives and conditions for their own purposes. This would, in conjunction with the desire to "nopCommerce copyright removal keys" to sell, lead to an unacceptable snowballing.

For each derivative, and derivatives of derivatives would have to run the nopCommerce logo. What makes the achievements of other developers remain brazen example unappreciated for one and for others, for a steady cash flow in the direction of nopCommerce is taken care of, and only there. Imagine me, the once very popular osCommerce, which is also under the GPL would have his wedding set and enforced such a license model: xt: Commerce> OXID eSales, Gambio, xtcModified etc. would never have arisen. Because xt: Commerce is a osCommerce Fork, and the latter Forks of xt: Commerce.

With what kind of spirit we have to do, is revealed very clearly when we take a look an excerpt from the first petition against the SmartStore AG to heart. It states, inter alia:
[...] To grant the applicant about the illegal distribution of the Software or derivatives of this software provides comprehensive information to us, although stating the nature and extent (in particular media and circulation of media and duration) the use and by service and support services for the nopCommerce software or derivatives of this software made ​​Gewinnnen *.
[...] To pay to the applicant damages by one by providing such information is to be determined amount plus interest at the rate of 8 percentage points above the respective base rate since pendens.
* Emphasis by

This raises nopCommerce claims on the profits generated through support, services and customizing. This is a very creative monetization idea. If one was continuing this thought, you would have to also want to participate in the profits of shop owners who have the so-called "copyright removal license fee" is not paid. The verschlägt a smooth language.

Finally, we would say: the makers of nopCommerce must adhere to the open source principles. This includes among other things, not to prevent others from free use. Would enforce their desire or even a precedent that would be the end of open source in general.

All this comes only to proof which nopCommerce is a huge work and need a huge dedication.
And above all, to write a source code how this for nopCommerce is hugely above of the professional, intellectual, ethical capacity of this individuals.
I said this in relation to the fact of persons which simply grab the code and want place his names how creators and earn money without work. If not what the problem with nopCommerce name in the footer of my site?
If are possible I want to see the lawsuit of Telerik® and others great professionals against nopCommerce Team.


They can maybe (depends on the law) to thief and that's all...
ps: Sorry if my bad English causes a few confusion.

Just my 2 cents...


First off I would like to give some credit to SmartStore, they have done some great work on theming and introducing the WebAPI, however I think forking the source code and ignoring the licence terms are the completely the wrong way to go.

I don't see how re-branding nopCommerce into SmartStore gives any business advantage when all that is being introduced are more plugins and themes, surely SmartStore would want to take advantage of nopCommerce's current and loyal user base and not having to maintain an open source project.

Finally its not like the licence terms are hard to meet, Im sure SmartStore can incorporate the Copyright removal into the fee for their theme/plugins and pass that on to nopCommerce.

I am sure everyone agree's that mutual collaboration between nopCommerce and Smartstore will benefit everybody.

Wil

evopos wrote:
Hi Wil,

Thanks. Sure, we all will benefit. But SmartStore should start meeting our license terms first.

UPDATE: And here we go. The court announced its decision today. We won! Right, it's over! Flawless Victory! Instead of just returning "powered by nopcommerce”, SmartStore AG is not allowed to distribute SmartStore anymore.

They will have to pay back all existing lawyer and court costs to Nop Solutions Ltd. And they also have to pay us ALL service and support fees they got since they offer SmartStore.

Of course, SmartStore can go to the next court instance. Let's see whether they will do it. But our lawyes and I are completely sure that SmartStore AG will lose again if they try. They can try to delay court results this way for several months more. But they should not do it if they want to get a chance for some deal with us. SmartStore has about one month to decide whether they will go to the next court instance. So now we just have to wait. Our further steps will depend on it.

I understand that this court decision can completely kill this company. We do not want it. We also do not want to harm existing users of SmartStore. nopCommerce and SmartStore could collaborate. Let's wait and see whether SmartStore wants it.

I also would like to thank the community and everybody who supported us. Thanks a lot! Special dedicated thanks to nopDynamics, our solution partner from Germany. Jorg (CEO of this company) continuously helped me with this case. Thanks a lot!

This is a second great news today : )

Congratulations!!!!

Did both parties attend court?