JW Video Player not allowed on commercial / corporate sites.

Do you folks realize that EVERYONE using this script with ads turned on is in violation of the TOS for using the JW Player and of international copyright laws?

The free version is licenced under creative commons: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ Absolutely no commercial use allowed and if you build any mods to the player you have to release them for free too. If you don’t buy a commercial license, you cannot use a JW Player on (i) a site that has ads; (ii) a corporate site; or a (iii) CMS.

You cannot use the JW player on any site that has any advertising whatsoever, unless you purchase a pro license. It's 30 British pounds to use the player on one commercial site: http://www.longtailvideo.com/players/order

Just curious if anyone knew that or if you are just ignoring it.


It's too bad he's got this Longtail video thing going. Longtail is a formula that lets you put pre- and post-roll ads in your site, but if you use it you have to share your ad revenue with Longtail. Even to run your own ads, you have to give Longtail space on your site to run their ads.

And if you build a way to run pre-and post roll ads using the JW player, you are basically violating the license.

And you are posting this to accomplish... what?

Do you work for Longtail? Or are you just posting because you are genuinely concerned? The fact of the matter is that, yes, you are correct in that a commercial license is required for the 4.X code of JW player as outlined in the license that I (meaning me) have paid for. However, the JW player included with vShare is the 3.X player which was released before the commercial requirement existed and, thus, is exempt from licenses.

But, getting back my original statement, you are not going to accomplish anything by making a post like that, at least not here. Most of the people who use vShare probably do not care that licensing exists or is even required for 4.X players. A lot of the people who run vShare do not even use JW (most have moved to using commercial players). Almost no one here has ever modified the JW player in any way. If you really want to "fight the good fight," you should direct your post to asking the admin to choose a different player for future releases versus going after people here who may or may not know that licensing is required for the newer players.

I would assume that JW is aware that their video player is in this very active paid script. I would also assume that the developer isn't having issues with this company or it would have been removed by now.
Also i would olmost put money on it that this scripts generates JW money. Also who's not to say they dont have a deal worked out?
How do you know a certain chunk of the script sale dont go their way?

bplex wrote: "And you are posting this to accomplish... what?....But, getting back my original
statement, you are not going to accomplish anything by making a post like that, at least not
here. Most of the people who use vShare probably do not care that licensing exists or is
even required for 4.X players."

Yes exactly my point. Most don't care because they don't know that you are encouraging this copyright
violation. I didn't "go after" anyone as your post suggests. I made a general statement not directed at any
one person. You on the other hand obviously "went after" me. And you are lying when you say "most
people" have switched to a commercial player. "Most people" don't have that capability.
It's called "sharing information". I am interested in educating people on Internet copyright, but obviously
that's not a concern here. No I don't work for JW, and if you weren't so defensive and ignorant, you'd be
able to see from my post that I am not a fan of longtail.

The fact that you blocked my profile after I made this one post shows me that you know I'm right and
that I hit a nerve. I see a lot of bitching on this board about stolen scripts, etc. Pretty much says it all.

bplex also wrote: "the JW player included with vShare is the 3.X player which was released before the commercial requirement existed and, thus, is exempt from licenses."

Bplex your ignorance or ability to just lie about situations that make you uncomfortable is showing. Jw media player 3 ALSO required a paid license to use it commercially. http://www.download.com/JW-FLV-Media-Pl ... 97402.html - "Please purchase a Creative Commons License if you are using the JW FLV Media Player for commercial purposes." That's the version 3 page on download.com

Big boy posted "I would assume that JW is aware that their video player is in this very active paid script. I would also assume that the developer isn't having issues with this company or it would have been removed by now.
Also i would olmost put money on it that this scripts generates JW money. Also who's not to say they dont have a deal worked out? How do you know a certain chunk of the script sale dont go their way?"

I'm sure you would "assume". But you assume incorrectly. JW LOSES money every time this script is sold because the developers do not alert you and others to the true nature of the theft taking place. How much of the $10 paid for this script do you think goes towards the $70 licensing fee that JW requires? Won't take you too many fingers to figure that out.

The subject of copyright is an important issue but your reply shows that it's not that important to YOU. I guess trying to educate about copyright in this forum is a little like arguing with a drunk. You - Bplex - obviously are making a ton of mony from selling mods to this stolen script and is why your hackles are up, and your brain is shut down.

Feel free to delete this account, but the thread has been copied and fowarded to the JW developers, whom I assure you will be quite interested.

First of all:

1. I do not work for, nor do I own Buyscripts (the company that makes vShare).
2. I did not block anything from you. I am not a moderator here.

I believe you have mistaken me for the owners of this software. My friend, I am just a consumer here. My statement to you was not an attack on you or your post. Rather, it was a statement stating facts. Fact one being that the player that comes with vShare was before JW/Longtail required licensing and, two, that many people have moved to commercial players (I know this because I have helped tons of people do it). Even though version 3 has a license requirement today, it did not have one when vShare started using it. Thus my point.

Secondly, as I stated before, I agree with your statement in that people should purchase a license if they use the player commercially. However, I also stated that people here probably do not know or care as when they purchase vShare, they usually do not care that part "A" can't be used or part "B" requires a license. All they know is that they purchased something and expect to use it, which is why I made the point to you asking what are you trying to accomplish with your post?

If education is really your intent, then your post would have been worded differently. You wrote a posting attacking people who use vShare when your real issue should be with the developers who chose to use JW in their script. Further, since you state that you do not work for JW/Longtail, why do, or should you, have an issue with what someone else does, especially since you are assuming that most people here do not have licenses. You do not know what other people here have. Neither do I, which is why I don't assume anything. I know from what I see.

As for this being an uncomfortable issue for me, how can it be? As I stated in my post, I have an unlimited domain license for my copy of JW that I use on my own site (that being my primary and my development domains). I purchased it after I purchased vShare. So I don't have any sort of issue. In fact, I even worked with Longtail a bit on troubleshooting their Ad solution when they released it. Directly worked with two of their developers on it.

As for vShare being a stolen script, it actually isn't. vShare started as a commercial fork of another script. There are about two or three known youtube clones that have a similar code base as they all started from the same fork. vShare is the only one from that original fork that is still being developed and maintained.

As for copyright not being an important issue to me, on the contrary it is. However, going after the consumers of a product on a copyright issue is the wrong approach. Rather, if you feel as though it is your duty to point out copyright violations, you should go after the producer. If I bought something from a company that I thought was legitimately able to sell me something and it turned out that they sold me something illegal, I'm not at fault. Rather, it's the person who sold it to me. Case and point, if you purchase an illegal copy of Micrsoft Windows, for example, and it fails WGA, Microsoft doesn't come after you. Instead, they work with you to get you a legal license (normally, they do not charge you). Rather, they go after the person who sold it to you. I know this for a fact because I partner with Microsoft in my daily business.

As for me encouraging people to violate copyrights, where have I done that? I haven't encouraged anyone to do anything. What people do is their business, not mine. If people go out and say they want to integrate something into their site, it is not my job to verify whether or not they purchased a license for it. Unlike yourself, I am not a Copyright Narc. That isn't my job. If they are using something that they haven't paid for, it will catch up with them in the long run. But, it's not my business to do.

As for my mods, I make mods for vShare because I can, not because there is something to gain. Making mods isn't my business. It's something that I do on the site. If vShare were gone tomorrow, it would not hurt me in any way. I would convert my sites to another script and keep going.

As for my hackles being up and my brains being shutdown, that is the most ignorant statement you could post. It is becoming obvious to me that you, CC2 or CopyrightCopy, or whatever you want to be known as, have an agenda that goes beyond education. Your tactics are blatently simple and you are obviously a younger person by your response. The point is that while what you are trying to do is noble, your execution needs a ton of work. You are not going to accomplish anything the way that you are going about it. In fact, the only thing that you are going to do is to get banned or your account deleted by the admins.

As for you stating that you are going to report this to JW, go right ahead. This is your right to do if you feel so strongly about it. No one is going to stop you. I'm sure you are probably not the first person to do so and will probably not be the last.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CopyrightCop

Do you folks realize that EVERYONE using this script with ads turned on is in violation of the TOS for using the JW Player and of international copyright laws?

---

Get bent.

To begin with, I do not use that crappy player. Even if I did, I doubt that my site earns enough for Jeroen to really consider it commercial use. Even if so, he is the only only with any reason to be throwing terms in my face. Unless you are Jeroen Wijering, and you are not, buzz off.