Script Partial Encoding / Domain locking ?

[Kfir]

It will be decrypted eventually, it will just take a little longer but will still hurt the costumers.

[billybubba]

Without a doubt, vBulletin is the gold standard for php scripts. Not a bit of it is encrypted, encoded, or otherwise obfuscated. The code itself is beautiful. The Jelsoft programming team adheres to very strict coding standards right down to the formatting of the code. Support on it is the best there is. Patches and updates come out frequently.

Yes, even a mediocre programmer with minimal php skills could strip out serial number information from vbulletin and warez it out, but the vast majority of vBulletin webmasters love Jelsoft, know the script is the best, and are proud of that powered-by line that proclaims their site runs genuine vBulletin.

No offense, but the quality of this script ain't even close to vBulletin. Then again, it isn't as mature either. vBulletin gets better all the time because the customers find bugs themselves, and suggest patches right on Jelsoft's support forum.

I think it's a good idea to keep the source unencrypted, keep this support forum, and look out for patches and mods supplied by us, your paying customers. Quite a few of us have superb programming skills, but would rather dish out $200 for a patch-able, pre-made script than start from scratch. Code maturity means a lot.

Straight up, I would not have bought this script if it was zend obfuscated.

[flamewalker]

I only vote for the complete unencoded version, unless the following are true:

• I can customize the software reasonably with encryption
• I have the option to purchase the source code for more in-depth customization (IE to the backend)

Conceivably, with the above you could lower the price of the encoded version some, and raise the price or make it an add-on to buy the full source.

You have every right to protect your software. For my purposes I will probably be heavily modifying the script if/when I purchase it, so the ability to get access to the full unencoded source will be necessary most certainly. In my experience the encoding/decoding process often causes more trouble than is worth for the software, so most times I won't buy software thats encoded unless its something I know I won't need to modify for specific purposes, or I can buy the source as necessary.

Certain kinds of software, I don't need full source but for the project I have planned for GameReplay.com, I will most likely need it.

[guavaleaf]

First let me say that you are doing a pretty good job with the development of this script. However, you Clip Share guys are selling a script that could potentially be the base for a rival to YouTube. I for one would not want to be the next big video sharing site with a encrypted file tied to you or any other company. For example I paid for ClipSHare to remove all branding from the script. What do I get, right click on the flash player, "ClipShare"... roll over the bookmark links "ClipShare". In my opinion, this is not professional. By doing this you are leveling the playing field for my competitors. While I understand the need for you to protect your development investment, it should not be by creating a umbilical cord between myself and you.

Maybe the solution is to develop a registration system and outline in your agreement that sharing or distributing the script is not allowed. Then follow up with legal action or by contacting the isp hosting the script.

The point is you cannot hold the people who are purchasing the script and using it in a legit manner hostage because others are using its in a non legit manner.

I understand your dilemma, but I don't want the freedom to use the script (that I paid for) infringed upon because others are misusing it (the script).

[typo3lab]

my customers need full source code
This is important reqrement for majority of serios web-projects with the buget more then 3000$
May be you can sell full source code for 500-900$ ?

[Danny]

People are starting to jump to wrong conlusions...

CLIPSHARE IS NOT ENCODED. This Poll Is Made Just To See Your Opinions Regarding This.

[frenzy3]

look at offering a locked version... cheep and easy to use.. and the open one only to verified buyers... ie once they have proven to be trusted..

maybe just lock one part of the site... either way i voted to keep it open

[Aryos]

im kind of torn, as a guy who is a huge fan of torrents and not paying ridiculous amount for generally bad software (for my own private non-commercial use), i hate copy protection and stuff like that, however seeing that my company has bought and paid for the clip-share script i feel maybe we should protect it.

Should I love you or hate you?

what about releasing a really bare bones version for free , so people can get into it, and then maybe decide to buy the real deal with some kind of copy protection built in. i know clip-share prob. wont like this, but it will most likely, in the not-so-long-term bring more profit and undoubtedly more exposure, while the increase in community voices and minds can only serve to improve the software exponentially.

We could release a FULLY encoded version, as a demo, to work only in localhost and with no installations needed (a click'nrun, ready version with a portable server). In fact, such a version already exists for 3.0.1. Chris is getting one, as a matter of fact, to locally develop his templates.

[wingchun22]

when any script is posted across warez site , the owners will think copy protection is the way to go, but its not

leave it open and easy to edit and poeple will work and devople mods addons and so forth

locking code will in the long term loose you your customer base as other scripts pop up that are free, cheaper, better or even open soucre

locking code is not the way to go