Digging through a lot of old topics I finally found this post by me. The basic idea of this suggestion is to provide a couple blocks that report the usernames of 1) the owner of a project and 2) the original creator of a project.

The first block, “owner username” or “owner” or “project owner”, would always report the owner of a project or remix. This value can only change when a project is created or remixed.

if <(username) = (owner)>
  say [You're the owner of this project!]
else
  say [You don't own this project.]
end

The second block, “original creator username” or “creator” or “original owner”, reports the original creator of the project in it and all remixes of it. Any remixes will inherit this value which cannot be changed after a project is made. Downloading a project will also keep this value.

if <(username) = (original creator)>
  say [You made the original project!]
else
 say [You didn't make the original project.]
end

This may finally solve the cold case of stolen projects by providing direct evidence of ownership of a project.

Surely the “remixed by” text below the project name solves the “cold case of stolen projects”…

I can't think of anything that this could be used for right now, but there's probably something….

why?
username = (sign hear “owner”)

Think this is an exceptional idea! This way one can do:

when gf clicked
if <not <(owner) = (original creator)>>
broadcast [show credit v] //for use in showing who made the original

This could really help show that a remix is a remix, but then the owner could make scripts hidden behind others that constantly stop or mess with the project if the “(owner) does not equal (original creator)”. For that reason of vandilization, I don't support

Bump.

cloud_fade wrote:

This could really help show that a remix is a remix, but then the owner could make scripts hidden behind others that constantly stop or mess with the project if the “(owner) does not equal (original creator)”. For that reason of vandilization, I don't support

You could always do the same without the block anyways.

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

Bump.

cloud_fade wrote:

This could really help show that a remix is a remix, but then the owner could make scripts hidden behind others that constantly stop or mess with the project if the “(owner) does not equal (original creator)”. For that reason of vandilization, I don't support

You could always do the same without the block anyways.

But that just makes it more tempting.

That's a main reason why free chats won't be allowed with cloud lists…

Splodgey wrote:

Surely the “remixed by” text below the project name solves the “cold case of stolen projects”…

I can't think of anything that this could be used for right now, but there's probably something….

If a project is downloaded and reuploaded, then there is no “remixed by” text under the project name.

I semi-support but…

I looked at the original topic where someone made a point about the license under which projects are shared.

Big necropost, but linked from here.

Anyways, I think that the original creator block could prevent remixing.

PkmnQ wrote:

Big necropost, but linked from here.

Anyways, I think that the original creator block could prevent remixing.

Wdym?
I don't support this as there is an easy workaround, but I'm confused as to what you're saying/

jaguar1501 wrote:

PkmnQ wrote:

Big necropost, but linked from here.

Anyways, I think that the original creator block could prevent remixing.

Wdym?
I don't support this as there is an easy workaround, but I'm confused as to what you're saying/

if <not <(owner :: sensing reporter) = (original creator :: sensing reporter)>> then {
break the project :: custom stack
} :: control stack

would prevent remixing.

I don't see why you can't just do this:

<(username) = [INSERT USERNAME HERE]>

Anyone care to explain?

Why would you need this?
On a project is says the original owner if it is a remix.

Super_Scratch_Bros20 wrote:

I don't see why you can't just do this:

<(username) = [INSERT USERNAME HERE]>

Anyone care to explain?

Yeah, that's the ‘easy workaround’ I mentioned in my post. I don't understand why you can't do that.

mlcreater wrote:

jaguar1501 wrote:

PkmnQ wrote:

Big necropost, but linked from here.

Anyways, I think that the original creator block could prevent remixing.

Wdym?
I don't support this as there is an easy workaround, but I'm confused as to what you're saying/

if <not <(owner :: sensing reporter) = (original creator :: sensing reporter)>> then {
break the project :: custom stack
} :: control stack

would prevent remixing.

1. You don't have to start the project to remix.
2. You can go inside the project and change the code so it doesn't do that.
3. You can't use certain blocks to ‘break the project’.

My thoughts on this:

- This is a rejected suggestion already, under “removing remixes” or something similar.
- This topic was likely the most legendary necropost in the history of necroposts on this site, congratulations.
- If someone figures out how to do this without new blocks like “original creator” then, well, there would be a workaround.

In total, NO SUPPORT


Clarifying:
This user wants a block to exist that checks for the creator of a project. The second suggestion, Original Creator, is to check for the creator of the first project in the remix tree.

The workaround

<(username) = [Username Here]>

Can be worked around by changing the name and uploading the remix.

Cloud data in remixes can be changed, too, so you couldn't feasibly encode something in cloud data and then decode it to the OP's username.

This user wants to have one reporter that always checks for the OP's username, not the remixer or the project owner, at least for the second suggestion.

Now then.

There is a workaround I've been thinking about, but the ST doesn't like people doing that.

Without being specific, it's about cloud data (something only the creator (or remixer) can edit.)

You store something in cloud data, (can't be specific what, you can likely guess) and then run a check on that something to check it against another thing of the same data type.

Create the stack, and then copy an obstructive costume into everything. You can even put a comment on the “DRM” stack.

In every sprite, run checks for the stack existing. Then, run checks for those checks.

If anything is amiss, break the project with those sprites.


Again, I'm not going to say how this works, because that would be a silly idea to just tell the Scratch community how to break the rules. I'm a responsible person, and am instead going to put the following statement below:

Scratch Team, if you're reading this, send an alert to me, and I'll design this rule-breaking “DRM” for the sole use of proving that it's possible.

qwertykid44 wrote:

- This topic was likely the most legendary necropost in the history of necroposts on this site, congratulations.

I don't think that's a reason to no support.

qwertykid44 wrote:

- If someone figures out how to do this without new blocks like “original creator” then, well, there would be a workaround.

Every suggestion in the world has workarounds, long or short, easy or hard. You can't just say that you don't support because someone will eventually figure out the workaround.

qwertykid44 wrote:

In total, NO SUPPORT

Writing it in bold like that makes it seem something bad and that actually matters.

jaguar1501 wrote:

Super_Scratch_Bros20 wrote:

I don't see why you can't just do this:

<(username) = [INSERT USERNAME HERE]>

Anyone care to explain?

Yeah, that's the ‘easy workaround’ I mentioned in my post. I don't understand why you can't do that.

mlcreater wrote:

jaguar1501 wrote:

PkmnQ wrote:

Big necropost, but linked from here.

Anyways, I think that the original creator block could prevent remixing.

Wdym?
I don't support this as there is an easy workaround, but I'm confused as to what you're saying/

if <not <(owner :: sensing reporter) = (original creator :: sensing reporter)>> then {
break the project :: custom stack
} :: control stack

would prevent remixing.

3. You can't use certain blocks to ‘break the project’.

define break the project
delete all of [initialization information v] :: list stack
delete all of [instructions v] :: list stack

, and then you would just have to design the project not to replace them.