Yes, open source is good for getting suggestions and improvements for your code, but what about stealing? Scratch projects can be remixed, yes, but they can also be copied and put on the website so no credit is given to the original creator. Even worse, they can entrepreneur the project, bringing in all the attention the original creator deserved! This also applies to anything else open-source.

So, my question is, how is this prevented? Are licenses effective?

Depends which licenses are being used. I think Scratch's licenses don't allow it.

Not sure but it's happened to me before and I have to agree with you on that point.

There are a lot of different types of open source licenses out there, and many of them are designed with different goals in mind, like @LP_Play said. I have generally found that their effectiveness is really about what your overall goals are.

If your goals are to show an original creation, you might choose a different license than if your goals are to have something that people can learn from by sharing, reusing and remixing as they would like.

Take our open source www code, for instance. It uses the MIT license, which allows people to share it and build on it, so long as their versions include the original MIT license in it. So, no one can make a version that uses the Scratch name unless they have our permission. Allowing people to easily build on the repo is something we encourage, because our main goal is to get the philosophy of Scratch out there.

And there are other open source licenses out there that handle this kind of thing differently, many of which require credit to the original creator (like the Creative Commons, which we use for projects created using Scratch). So this is good for projects, because it encourages sharing and remixing, while still empowering people to create unique things.

mewtaylor wrote:

It uses the MIT license, which allows people to share it and build on it, so long as their versions include the original MIT license in it. So, no one can make a version that isn't open source, but anyone can build on it.

They can. You have to keep the MIT license but you can add additional restrictions

Jonathan50 wrote:

They can. You have to keep the MIT license but you can add additional restrictions

Yup you're right I misspoke! Thanks for the catch – just updated the comment accordingly.

Yes so true

when green flag clicked
set [ Awesomeness] to [1,000]

As far as I know, MIT License (What Scratch uses) completely allows this. No licenses are effective for this except plain copyright.

This is basically a license I'm using for stuff I publish that I'll talk about on Scratch

anyway this should generally stop anybody from copying without giving you credit. (except for .SB2, .OTF, .TTF, and .SPRITE2 files.) enjoy.
it does permit copying the agreement itself and modifying it and closes up its loopholes.
– Copy the agreement below this line. –
abbuta2006 LICENSE AGREEMENT
This agreement shall be known as the abbuta2006 LICENSE AGREEMENT and applies once downloaded.
I. Free Use
The abbuta2006 license agreement grants “minimal restriction” distribution of
“GAME” (described in VI.), however derivatives are not allowed under the “AGREEMENT”
(described in VI.) Free use is allowed when described as use without requirement of
payment and no legal consequences when used without payment (“free”).
II. Use Without Credit
The abbuta2006 license agreement grants “restricted” use without credit.
The only circumstances where the software can be used without credit is when:
The software is being distributed by “creator” (defined in VI.)
The software has been distributed for use by someone other than “creator”.
The software is being distributed for use for operations classified as “educational” (defined in IV).
III. Distribution Without License
The software may not be distributed without license unless the following conditions are met:
The use of the software is conducive to research.
The software will be defined under the MIT License with the copy-holder being the “creator”.
IF the software is being used by “creator” or permission has been given by “creator”, then the use is automatically permitted.
IF the software is being used for “educational” purposes, then the use is automatically permitted.
IV. Educational Use
Classification as “educational” meets any of the following requirements:
The “GAME” will be used for a school or for an example for a class.
The “GAME” will be used for research.
The “GAME” idea will be used for a topic.
** MANDATORY: All files infringing on the normal abbuta2006 license agreement must be deleted within 6 hours of its download. **
V. License Distribution
This license shall be hereby known as the “abbuta2006 license agreement”.
License distribution shall be permitted unless used for software that meet ANY of these conditions:
Software that requires payment.
Software that has materials copy-locked under other licenses.
Software that is used for “malicious” (VI) purposes.
Software that infringes on copyrights.
Software that is being used outside of “jurisdiction” (VI).
Editing this license agreement for use in other software is allowed as long as I and II
VI. Defining Terms
The term “creator” is hereby given to Alvin Neo Rhaman, whose alias shall be known in the “agreement” as abbuta2006.
The term “GAME” in this agreement is defined as follows:
The software in which the “agreement” is issued to and created by abbuta2006 is defined as “GAME”.
“GAME” shall be created by abbuta2006 and be easy to verify as created by abbuta2006.
If the “GAME” is a font file (.TTF or .OTF file) then this license is null and void and shall be known under the Apache
License 2.0 (https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0).
If the “GAME” also has pre-existing agreements that conflict with this agreement, the conflicting chapter(s) are null and void.
If the “GAME” is a Scratch file (.SB2 or .SPRITE2 file) then this license is null and void and shall be known under the MIT (Expat) license
(https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/mit) to avoid confliction with current licenses.
Purposes designated as “malicious” meet ANY of these conditions:
They restrict the rights of other people.
They can cause spying (unallowed use of computer).
They are used for hacking.
They encourage infringement of laws present in the United States of America.
They encourage violence.
They contain content that would generally be considered inappropriate for young ages.
They encourage infringement of rights passed in the Constitution.
They infringe on laws present in the United States of America.
They restrict a user's use of their computer.
They restrict a user's use of their network.
They encrypt files without the user's permission.
They encourage software copying.
“AGREEMENT” and “agreement” are hereby defined as the abbuta2006 license agreement.
VII. Liability
“GAME” is provided as-is, with no express or implied warranty of any kind. All liability is hereby placed on the user. In no event will any liability of any
kind be placed on the “creator”, malfunction or otherwise.
If “GAME” is provided on Softonic (www.softonic.com) all warranty and liability is placed on Softonic (www.softonic.com). In this event, IV is invalid and
“educational” use is not allowed.
VIII. Crediting in Distribution
The distributer must provide credit to “creator” and any people defined by the “creator”.
IX. Legality
If any portion of this agreement is not legally possible, or should be modified to be legally stronger, please contact “creator” at alvin@alvinneo.com
or send him a Tweet at @PD_NeoRBLX.
X. Loophole Closure
Any item not specified in the agreement does not apply to the agreement and is hereby null and void.
If a rule conflicts with another rule and they are in different chapters, the rules shall be applied to the separate chapters. If the conflicting rules are in
the same chapter, both rules are null and void and should be replaced with the equivalent of the rule in the Apache License
(https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0).

zorket wrote:

Yes, open source is good for getting suggestions and improvements for your code, but what about stealing? Scratch projects can be remixed, yes, but they can also be copied and put on the website so no credit is given to the original creator. Even worse, they can entrepreneur the project, bringing in all the attention the original creator deserved! This also applies to anything else open-source.

So, my question is, how is this prevented? Are licenses effective?

you can get punished if you get reported so its not allowed

when this sprite right clicked
say [PLEASE ADD RIGHT CLICK DETECTION]

zorket wrote:

Yes, open source is good for getting suggestions and improvements for your code, but what about stealing? Scratch projects can be remixed, yes, but they can also be copied and put on the website so no credit is given to the original creator. Even worse, they can entrepreneur the project, bringing in all the attention the original creator deserved! This also applies to anything else open-source.

So, my question is, how is this prevented? Are licenses effective?

i think you can write “ please give credit to me and change something when you remix” in the notes and credits. if they just put “none” in the description etc. either tell them to give credit, or report them.

MayaSan wrote:

Stop The Copying!

I agree.

I agree too

I agree also.

Will someone get in REAL trouble if they copy a scratch game without giving credit? Nothing major, just putting sprites from another game in their backpack, importing it into their game, and publishing it without any credit?