squirrellydw Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Users wishing to use my work can continue to download it directly from my homepage. How am i suppose to use your work when I don't know how to make a docker? John did a great job using "your work" so I and others can install it. You should be happy that we are using it. Quote Link to comment
trurl Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Users wishing to use my work can continue to download it directly from my homepage. How am i suppose to use your work when I don't know how to make a docker? John did a great job using "your work" so I and others can install it. You should be happy that we are using it. He has a paypal donate button on his page that nobody will know about if they don't have to actually go to the page to download it. Quote Link to comment
JonathanM Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Users wishing to use my work can continue to download it directly from my homepage. How am i suppose to use your work when I don't know how to make a docker? John did a great job using "your work" so I and others can install it. You should be happy that we are using it. He has a paypal donate button on his page that nobody will know about if they don't have to actually go to the page to download it. I can see both sides of this argument to some degree, but to be fair, John EXPLICITLY directs people to go to the authors web page as a requirement to set up the software. It's not like the zap2 guy is losing page views, on the contrary, he's getting much more exposure, much of which simply would not happen without a docker container being available. Quote Link to comment
johnodon Posted March 3, 2016 Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 Users wishing to use my work can continue to download it directly from my homepage. How am i suppose to use your work when I don't know how to make a docker? John did a great job using "your work" so I and others can install it. You should be happy that we are using it. He has a paypal donate button on his page that nobody will know about if they don't have to actually go to the page to download it. I can see both sides of this argument to some degree, but to be fair, John EXPLICITLY directs people to go to the authors web page as a requirement to set up the software. It's not like the zap2 guy is losing page views, on the contrary, he's getting much more exposure, much of which simply would not happen without a docker container being available. Hell...I'll even add a link to his Paypal donation if he wants me to. Quote Link to comment
zap2xml Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 The only issue is that it is my work and I am the only one that chooses the terms of my work just as Lime Technology chooses the terms of their software and registration system. John O'Donnell initially said "If you insist that I cease redistribution for non-commercial use, I will do so." He then threatened to copy my work and rename it for his use. "Piss off... ... I had a friend of mine write a perl script called scrapezap. " Please remove the hosting of, and cease the redistribution of my work. Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 John O'Donnell, You have taken my work from my home page which states that it is not to be redistributed and, without permission (without even asking), you have packaged it up and redistributed it. If my non-redistributable work is not distributed in a method to your liking then it is simply not appropriate for you. You don't get to set the terms of my software. There are other products out there with license terms compatible to your use. Please remove the hosting of, and cease the redistribution of my work. Why can't you give him a direct link to the script so he doesn't have to redistribute your work? Problem solved. You did make this tool for people to use it I assume? This would certainly seem a reasonable solution -- especially if John adds a note indicating the author of the script requests donations if you find the tool useful and includes a direct link to his donation page [as he said he would do]. ... It does seem like a petty argument -- there's clear attribution of credit for the script including links to the site; and John's not pretending he did any of the work ... it's very clear he simply built a Docker container. Surely this can be resolved amicably. Quote Link to comment
unevent Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 My 2 cents...suggest posting a guide on how to make the Docker for the zap2xml script and stop hosting his work baked-in. Not much different scenario here than the preclear plugin using Joe L.'s script. Edit: or if there is a way to use the script while stored outside the Docker in appdata, then have a requirement for the user to visit the zap site to get the script and place it in the configured appdata location. Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 My 2 cents...suggest posting a guide on how to make the Docker for the zap2xml script and stop hosting his work baked-in. Not much different scenario here than the preclear plugin using Joe L.'s script. Edit: or if there is a way to use the script while stored outside the Docker in appdata, then have a requirement for the user to visit the zap site to get the script and place it in the configured appdata location. Yes, that would be a good solution => especially the 2nd one, where there's no extra work involved to integrate the script with the Docker. Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 My personal opinion only in this very strange situation. I can only see the licenses of the upstream dependencies and not the license zap2xml is distributed under. This is the root of the misunderstanding that I myself would easily have made. Anyone can be forgiven for missing "not for redistribution" hidden among 2467 other words. Saying that the situation has been clarified now and the docker as it is today should be removed immediately. The proposed solution that writes a guide and a container that need the user to complete seems viable under the terms of redistribution but not within the current terms of the license and copyright. Depending on your location no license means a large variety of things from "fair use for satire only" and "public domain" all the way to "not licensed". Equally the statement of "personal use" is unclear as it specifically omits the "non commercial clause" that stops any corporate installation i.e. "personal" does not mean sole. The spirit however is clear that "personal" should mean sole use which in turn means no family usage (which is odd). My opinion is the author is obviously 100% right and until the license is clarified any work done to make it easier to install using docker could be negated. Find an alternative. Quote Link to comment
Squid Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 While I almost feel like saying "get over it", the author of zap2xml has made his wishes clear, and zap2xml and zap2xml-2lineups are now blacklisted within CA. If / when the licencing issues get sorted out or the container is reconfigured to avoid them altogether, drop me a line and I will whitelist them (or issue a pull request on https://github.com/Squidly271/Community-Applications-Moderators/blob/master/Moderation.json) Quote Link to comment
squirrellydw Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Glad I got it when I did. Quote Link to comment
jonp Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 Tom requested that I post the below message here as johnodon's e-mail address doesn't appear to be working (the one associated with the forum account): Hi ‘johnodon’, Re: zap2xml author take down request: I went to the guy’s website and downloaded the script. He has no license information at all which means he can dictate anything he wants. See for example: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/148146/open-source-code-with-no-license-can-i-fork-it Why is he doing this? Maybe because he wants to drive traffic to his site, so everyone sees his big ‘DONATE’ buttons? who knows I was wondering, have you have tried to work out a deal? For example, maybe offer to put his donate button somewhere, like on the container settings page, or other appropriate place? If he insists on only end users going to his site and downloading the script, then you have to comply with his wishes. Well you don’t have to, but we would ask you to remove the container and discussion threads from our forum. I hope you understand. Quote Link to comment
squirrellydw Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 I say we all donate to Johnodon and give NOTHING to the other guy. The other guy is acting like big baby IMO. Quote Link to comment
trurl Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 ...or if there is a way to use the script while stored outside the Docker in appdata, then have a requirement for the user to visit the zap site to get the script and place it in the configured appdata location. This seems like the best solution. Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 ...or if there is a way to use the script while stored outside the Docker in appdata, then have a requirement for the user to visit the zap site to get the script and place it in the configured appdata location. This seems like the best solution. Agree ... this completely isolates the Docker from the underlying script. With an easy-to-follow outline of what the user needs to do r.e. downloading the script and where to store it, this would eliminate any conflict between the two software authors. Quote Link to comment
aptalca Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 johnodon, I wish you didn't delete the github repo for this. I was gonna send a patch to externalize the zap2xml perl script as unevent suggested: have the user download it and place into the the config folder. Then there would be no issue with the author and the docker would simply be a distinct wrapper. Anyway to undelete? Quote Link to comment
bnevets27 Posted October 8, 2018 Share Posted October 8, 2018 johnodon, I wish you didn't delete the github repo for this. I was gonna send a patch to externalize the zap2xml perl script as unevent suggested: have the user download it and place into the the config folder. Then there would be no issue with the author and the docker would simply be a distinct wrapper. Anyway to undelete? Well it looks like the docker container is still on docker hub and the docker template is still on github. Wonder if you could still install it that way and just replace the script within the container with the latest version of the script? There is also this: https://github.com/johnodon/zapscrape This was definitely a crappy way for this docker to die. Would an alternative be the webgrab+ plus? Look like it can grab from zap2it also but I haven't tired it yet. Nevermind. I found a working solution. And I bet you know what that solution was. For everyone else. Look around, usual places. Only not linking to anything because I don't want to take away from johnodon's work and help the zap2xml dev find and ruin another project. Quote Link to comment
donbrew Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 zap2xml.awardspace.info has disappeared. Where can I find zap2xml? Quote Link to comment
maxik Posted December 9, 2022 Share Posted December 9, 2022 Bump - have an enigma2 receiver and on jellyfin the m3u list. Now i would like to implement a xmltv but i'm totally stranded. Any info about something easy to use? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.