6

I made an open-source blog theme(template) based on Hugo's static web page generator.

This is my first step to the open-source world. So I didn't know much about license things. I copied and pasted an MIT license from an other Hugo theme. I didn't notice that there was a column with the owner's name in the MIT license.

After a month, I found that there is a column with the owner's name in the MIT license. So I changed it to my name. Now, I have a problem: The Hugo theme's owner that I copied the license from, come to my GitHub repository and insisted that I have to keep his name on the LICENSE.MD file in my project.

I thought that this is none-sense, because I made this project from scratch. I worked really hard to make this project. I don't want any other person listed on LICENSE.MD file. This link is a full discussion about this with the person.

I don't know what I should do. Please help.

Actually, I referenced some code from his project. I referenced the way of loading the library. No more than that. Something like this.

{{ printf "script defer src=\"%s\" integrity=\"%s\" crossorigin=\"anonymous\" title=\"katex\"></script" $js.katex.url $js.katex.sri | safeHTML }}

I think this is the way of doing something in Hugo. I can edit this part very easily. But the person keeps insisting that I should keep his name in my LICENSE.MD file, and does not point out to me anything about a copied code.

I just removed all the code that I referenced from that person's Hugo theme now.

MadHatter
  • 48,547
  • 4
  • 122
  • 166
zzossig
  • 63
  • 4
  • 2
    "I made this project from scratch" and "I used a static web page generator" are pretty much mutually exclusive. Either you used a generator and modified that or you started with nothing and truly made something 'from scratch'. – Brandin Dec 02 '19 at 06:52
  • @zzossig; I believe the first sentence of you question is incorrect, maybe due to language. A template is not "based" on Hugo. A template is written by an author in HTML / Go template tags and Hugo generates a static HTML site out of it. So did you mean: My template is using Hugo generator; Or: My template is based on a Hugo stock template? – Tim Dec 23 '19 at 09:39
  • @Tim; My template is using Hugo generator. The template is written by me in HTML /Go template tags. – zzossig Dec 23 '19 at 10:46
  • @Tim the OP also links to his/her github project, which in turn lets you follow back to the work which the OP's project may or may not be a derivative of. If you follow those links, do they help clarify whether the possibly-source work is another template, or the Hugo generator itself? – MadHatter Dec 23 '19 at 11:21
  • @MadHattersupportsMonica the linked work is a collection of themes, widgets and tools, intended to be used with the Hugo generator. Hugo is hosted here under an Apache license. – Tim Dec 24 '19 at 00:04
  • @Tim thanks! Do you feel the first sentence would be clearer if it read "I made an open-source blog theme (template) for the Hugo static web page generator, based on someone else's Hugo template"? – MadHatter Dec 28 '19 at 09:46
  • @MadHattersupportsMonica No, my blog theme is not based on someone else's Hugo template, really. Anyone can easily find out that the code is totally different if you compare the source. I referenced a nano piece of code. – zzossig Dec 29 '19 at 07:26
  • @zzossig in the first sentence of your original question, you stipulated that you made a template based on something. We're having a legitimate enquiry into what, exactly, that was, but it's a bit late to resile from your own position - that your work was derivative - now, just because you don't like the consequences. Moreover, even if your code is completely different now, that doesn't prevent it from being a derivative of something else if you started (which you did, as the github history shows) by copying that other thing, and then completely modifying the copy; see Ship of Theseus. – MadHatter Dec 29 '19 at 09:39
  • I didn’t started by copying that other thing. The license file was included after a month. At least I can tell the truth. I started my project by typing hugo new site zzo It's not true that my theme is based on another template. And the first sentence, I think I selected the wrong word. My theme is using Hugo(static web page generator). not based on Hugo – zzossig Dec 29 '19 at 18:02
  • I'm using Google Translate and Grammarly to write my thought in English. Actually, based on is not what intended to express. I think I didn't notice the subtle differences of the using and based on – zzossig Dec 29 '19 at 18:25

1 Answers1

5

I made an open-source blog theme(template) based on Hugo's static web page generator.

That's pretty much the beginning and the end of the analysis, right there. Your work is a derivative of Hugo's generator, by your own admission.

I just removed all the code that I referenced from that person's Hugo theme now.

This brings you up against what is known as the paradox of the Ship of Theseus. You can search here for more information, but my opinion is that a completely-refactored work is still a derivative, unless special care is taken, which in your case it was not. This means both you and the original author have a copyright interest in your code. That given, your obligations under the MIT licence are that:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

It doesn't say "derivatives", which is interesting, but it also doesn't say "verbatim copies", so I see a strong argument that derivatives are copies. If they are, then the licence requires that you preserve the original copyright notice, and failure to do so means you're committing copyright infringement. The penalties for that vary by jurisdiction.

I think the safest and most appropriate thing to do is to preserve the original author's copyright notice, while adding your own, eg

Copyright (c) 2016-2019 George Cushen
Copyright (c) 2019-present Z Zossig

You have not decided to relicense your code, so reproducing the licence text is easy, as you will be including it in your code anyway.

I notice that in the linked github issue the original author requests that you use a particular markup language (TOML) to acknowledge the original author and licence. You are not obliged to do so, and doing so will not free you from the licence obligation to preserve the original copyright notice, so whether or not you honour that request is entirely up to you.

MadHatter
  • 48,547
  • 4
  • 122
  • 166
  • Thanks for the answer. But I have a question. You mentioned that > I think the safest and most appropriate thing to do is to preserve the original author's copyright notice, while adding your own, eg< Is this an obligation? Or some organization or person can force me to do so? Or do I have a moral responsibility to do so? – zzossig Dec 01 '19 at 13:51
  • I just to want to know what happens If I refuse to specify his name in the license file. – zzossig Dec 01 '19 at 14:38
  • 3
    @zzossig, nobody knows what will happen, but what can happen is that the original author requests github to take your code down for violating his copyrights. In an absolutely worst case scenario, this could go to court and the judge decides that you have to pay damages. – Bart van Ingen Schenau Dec 01 '19 at 17:52
  • @zzossig I have tried to clarify that. – MadHatter Dec 01 '19 at 21:19
  • 2
    I know, it's hard to stomach. But it really looks like you took someones work in order to create your own, and if it's copying the readme. Thus your work is a derivative and the original author(s) deserve(s) recognition. If you didn't need the original work to get started: why did you copy from it some files in the first place (even if only docs)? Also, it's no sign of weakness to concede that you use their theme to get started and make a completely independent one. – planetmaker Dec 02 '19 at 14:54
  • 2
    @zzossig I'm not sure I understand your reluctance to preserve the original author's copyright notice. There are, as far as I can tell, no practical downsides to doing so, and (if my argument above is correct, and the original author decides to make an issue of it) significant potential downsides to not doing so. – MadHatter Dec 02 '19 at 20:28
  • @MadHattersupportsMonica The reason I hesitated to do so is that I really afraid people might not notice my effort I hard worked in the past two months — especially someone who uses English as a second language. The word "original author" sounds like he built the skeleton of this project, and I put some flesh there. To be precise, the amount of code he contributed to this project is less than 0.001%. I even removed this. So I thought that he did not deserve to get the credit for this project. – zzossig Dec 03 '19 at 01:07
  • But I want to do the right thing. I will respect the opinions of the open-source community because I think I also a member of open-source. So, I have a plan. I will talk more about this issue with him. If he still insists, I would like to mention in the license file the names of everyone who contributed to this project. Possible candidates include Hugo official site document contributors, issue makers, pull requesters in this repository(those people is the one who really care about my project), and other theme owners that I referenced from. And I will put his name at the end of the list. – zzossig Dec 03 '19 at 01:07
  • I know it's childish. But I just can't resist it. – zzossig Dec 03 '19 at 01:09
  • Again, what you do in your "list of contributors" and how you order it is entirely up to you. But you do need to preserve the original author's copyright notice, and you should not start adding copyright notices from people who are not, currently, rightsholders. – MadHatter Dec 12 '19 at 09:18
  • I don't believe a Hugo site is a derative of the genetor. One writes Go templates and Hugo is just a tool that renders it to static html and optionaly acts a web server. – Tim Dec 23 '19 at 00:06
  • @Tim by the author's admission, in line one of the question, his/her work is a derivative of someone else's work. If you think that's wrong, though, you should go ahead and write your own answer, so the community can upvote it if they agree. – MadHatter Dec 23 '19 at 07:15
  • @MadHattersupportsMonica Your answer is fine. All I wanted to say, I'm a Hugo user myself and a template is not based on Hugo, but Hugo is the tool that renders it. I've added a comment to the question, asking to clarify this sentence. – Tim Dec 23 '19 at 09:43
  • @Tim thanks, all the clarification is much appreciated. Every expert helps! – MadHatter Dec 23 '19 at 11:19