Even their demo page of the script is down. The main page of the creator is still up though.

rewrite it slightly differently

jesus fuck man

>>55524164
How does that help me? I'm not concerned about the detection..

>>55524194
unless you're doing a LOT of logic that's incredibly specific -- if you change it up even slightly it should be fine

at worst cover your ass by stating where the code was originally since you obviously don't know if it was gpl / cc / etc

there's only so many ways to do something in a programming language, so people are bound to overlap each other in implementation.

just use the one you found as a guide to make your own jesus fuck

>>55524164
what he said, how can anyone sue you for something you made by "yourself"?

> Codecanyon
i dont even..

Alright. I got it. Thanks a lot!

>>55524099

It's extremely difficult to prove that a script is an illegal copy.

If the code contains

- A distinctive API
- A distinctive mathematical formula/ algorithm
- explicit reference of the authors
- Distinctive commenting
- Obfuscation that can be de-obfuscated back to the original source
- binary blobs
- tight coupling to a proprietary piece of software/ serialization format

you could be caught but the authors wouldn't be able to do anything - literally nothing

If the code contains

- login details
- the ability to get a working authenticated session
- personally identifiable information
- credit card details
- sections of copyrighted text such as a story or game script
- an exploit

you have more of a problem. If the script does something as dramatic as using stolen credit card details to gain a bank session id go ahead and delete that right now op

If it's some js library that does something small in the client then you'll be fine

>>55524418
Nope, no sessions or anything similar you mentioned. Nothing special actually.

Here's an archived version of the script:
http://web.archive.org/web/20151220013350/http://codecanyon.net/item/bitdrop-file-hosting-with-short-url-link/426023

>>55524457

being a server side script there would be no way for the authors to prove anything.

If you aren't selling it yourself you have nothing to worry about.

>>55524523
Thanks anon. That helped a lot. Have a nice day!

>There's actually a place to sell plugins and frameworks
>Literally enabling pajeets to get 'credentials'

What in the fuck is this world coming to? I mean, if your plugin/framework is good enough, then why not just fucking start a start-up business with the aim of contracting work using your plugin/framework? Are some devs really this disillusioned?

>>55524523

I should add that if you want a long term solution you could build something like that yourself fairly quickly. Start with a base wamp/mamp config and build out from there.

>>55524573
Yeah, sure, but why put my time into it when I can buy a $9 script, change it to my needs and use that?

>>55524625

I don't know really. Programming is fun so I like to try to make my own things out of curiosity.

>>55524573
>>55524625

You know I'm not even mad at you, I'm just disappointed at all these devs that were willing to sell their code.

You can easily buy a plugin/framework and then use your own website to demonstrate it then pass it off as your 'work' so you can put something on your resume. Then when a company hires you and asks you to do a project you just search what you need and then buy them. In a sense, it's literally Pay2Win.

I...I don't even know what is this world is coming to. First it was the artworks from devianart/Pixiv/whatever art sharing website that gets stolen and other fucks steal them to present as 'their work' but now even developers are doing it.

>>55524715
>You can easily buy a plugin/framework and then use your own website to demonstrate it then pass it off as your 'work' so you can put something on your resume. Then when a company hires you and asks you to do a project you just search what you need and then buy them. In a sense, it's literally Pay2Win.

Not really. Initially, you learn coding for a reason. You don't buy a script for your company and tell them to use that. I personally would not do that, and I also wouldn't put such a page on my resume, ever. Whoever does that is a fool - in my opinion.

It's not illegal if you don't get caught

>>55524744

I know. But have you seen how many fucking pajeets just use this kind of bullshit to get work in any sort of IT position and get a job?

I mean, the problem isn't just because code can be sold on a market and others can buy them for their own. It's also because HR departments are hardly competent most of the time so if they see something on someone's resume that demonstrates 'exceptional' work, then that person has a higher chance of getting the job.

Unbeknownst to them, that person just bought 'his work' from a market to get a job. In a sense, degrees just become a bare threshold to get recognized by HR departments. Thus, when they hire this pajeet to do work for them, their product also gets affected because said pajeet can't into properly doing work. Then what would be that pajeet's excuse? "Oh, some sort of technical problem" and the HR/Management accepts it as so because they're tech illiterates.

Sure this won't work for companies such as Amazon, Google, Apple, Airbnb, Facebook, Twitter, etc. but they're not the one targeted by pajeets - the companies targeted by them are those companies that 'just need' an IT person.

>>55524875
Yeah, it is a good point. But do you think it actually works?
Or have you had experiences? Because to me it sound quite risky, especially if your boss comes up and tells you to write some code quickly, you're basically fucked if you can't do it properly..

>>55524940
I've had quite the leisure of dealing with pajeets that can't even bother to fucking explain how their system works or how to troubleshoot intermediate software/hardware issues.

It becomes frustrating at first then eventually it gets sad; people that actually want to work at IT industries to gain experience are cheated out of it by pajeets who can only do the bare minimum of the stuff and are only hired because of their 'credentials'.

Sure it's risky, but these pajeets are not being asked to write code - they're just being asked to 'help' people in the company who are tech illiterate and the management can't judge them either because they're also tech illiterate.