disputes.7 6.2 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149
  1. .TH "DISPUTES" "7" "August 2021" "" ""
  2. .SH "NAME"
  3. \fBdisputes\fR \- Handling Module Name Disputes
  4. .P
  5. This document describes the steps that you should take to resolve module name
  6. disputes with other npm publishers\. It also describes special steps you should
  7. take about names you think infringe your trademarks\.
  8. .P
  9. This document is a clarification of the acceptable behavior outlined in the
  10. npm Code of Conduct \fIhttps://www\.npmjs\.com/policies/conduct\fR, and nothing in
  11. this document should be interpreted to contradict any aspect of the npm Code of
  12. Conduct\.
  13. .SS TL;DR
  14. .RS 0
  15. .IP 1. 3
  16. Get the author email with \fBnpm owner ls <pkgname>\fP
  17. .IP 2. 3
  18. Email the author, CC support@npmjs\.com
  19. .IP 3. 3
  20. After a few weeks, if there's no resolution, we'll sort it out\.
  21. .RE
  22. .P
  23. Don't squat on package names\. Publish code or move out of the way\.
  24. .SS Description
  25. .P
  26. There sometimes arise cases where a user publishes a module, and then later,
  27. some other user wants to use that name\. Here are some common ways that happens
  28. (each of these is based on actual events\.)
  29. .RS 0
  30. .IP 1. 3
  31. Alice writes a JavaScript module \fBfoo\fP, which is not node\-specific\. Alice
  32. doesn't use node at all\. Yusuf wants to use \fBfoo\fP in node, so he wraps it in
  33. an npm module\. Some time later, Alice starts using node, and wants to take
  34. over management of her program\.
  35. .IP 2. 3
  36. Yusuf writes an npm module \fBfoo\fP, and publishes it\. Perhaps much later, Alice
  37. finds a bug in \fBfoo\fP, and fixes it\. She sends a pull request to Yusuf, but
  38. Yusuf doesn't have the time to deal with it, because he has a new job and a
  39. new baby and is focused on his new Erlang project, and kind of not involved
  40. with node any more\. Alice would like to publish a new \fBfoo\fP, but can't,
  41. because the name is taken\.
  42. .IP 3. 3
  43. Yusuf writes a 10\-line flow\-control library, and calls it \fBfoo\fP, and
  44. publishes it to the npm registry\. Being a simple little thing, it never
  45. really has to be updated\. Alice works for Foo Inc, the makers of the
  46. critically acclaimed and widely\-marketed \fBfoo\fP JavaScript toolkit framework\.
  47. They publish it to npm as \fBfoojs\fP, but people are routinely confused when
  48. \fBnpm install foo\fP is some different thing\.
  49. .IP 4. 3
  50. Yusuf writes a parser for the widely\-known \fBfoo\fP file format, because he
  51. needs it for work\. Then, he gets a new job, and never updates the prototype\.
  52. Later on, Alice writes a much more complete \fBfoo\fP parser, but can't publish,
  53. because Yusuf's \fBfoo\fP is in the way\.
  54. .IP 5. 3
  55. \fBnpm owner ls foo\fP\|\. This will tell Alice the email address of the owner
  56. (Yusuf)\.
  57. .IP 6. 3
  58. Alice emails Yusuf, explaining the situation \fBas respectfully as possible\fR,
  59. and what she would like to do with the module name\. She adds the npm support
  60. staff support@npmjs\.com to the CC list of the email\. Mention in the email
  61. that Yusuf can run npm owner \fBadd alice foo\fP to add Alice as an owner of the
  62. foo package\.
  63. .IP 7. 3
  64. After a reasonable amount of time, if Yusuf has not responded, or if Yusuf
  65. and Alice can't come to any sort of resolution, email support
  66. support@npmjs\.com and we'll sort it out\. ("Reasonable" is usually at least
  67. 4 weeks\.)
  68. .RE
  69. .SS Reasoning
  70. .P
  71. In almost every case so far, the parties involved have been able to reach an
  72. amicable resolution without any major intervention\. Most people really do want
  73. to be reasonable, and are probably not even aware that they're in your way\.
  74. .P
  75. Module ecosystems are most vibrant and powerful when they are as self\-directed
  76. as possible\. If an admin one day deletes something you had worked on, then that
  77. is going to make most people quite upset, regardless of the justification\. When
  78. humans solve their problems by talking to other humans with respect, everyone
  79. has the chance to end up feeling good about the interaction\.
  80. .SS Exceptions
  81. .P
  82. Some things are not allowed, and will be removed without discussion if they are
  83. brought to the attention of the npm registry admins, including but not limited
  84. to:
  85. .RS 0
  86. .IP 1. 3
  87. Malware (that is, a package designed to exploit or harm the machine on which
  88. it is installed)\.
  89. .IP 2. 3
  90. Violations of copyright or licenses (for example, cloning an MIT\-licensed
  91. program, and then removing or changing the copyright and license statement)\.
  92. .IP 3. 3
  93. Illegal content\.
  94. .IP 4. 3
  95. "Squatting" on a package name that you plan to use, but aren't actually
  96. using\. Sorry, I don't care how great the name is, or how perfect a fit it is
  97. for the thing that someday might happen\. If someone wants to use it today,
  98. and you're just taking up space with an empty tarball, you're going to be
  99. evicted\.
  100. .IP 5. 3
  101. Putting empty packages in the registry\. Packages must have SOME
  102. functionality\. It can be silly, but it can't be nothing\. (See also:
  103. squatting\.)
  104. .IP 6. 3
  105. Doing weird things with the registry, like using it as your own personal
  106. application database or otherwise putting non\-packagey things into it\.
  107. .IP 7. 3
  108. Other things forbidden by the npm
  109. Code of Conduct \fIhttps://www\.npmjs\.com/policies/conduct\fR such as hateful
  110. language, pornographic content, or harassment\.
  111. .RE
  112. .P
  113. If you see bad behavior like this, please report it to abuse@npmjs\.com right
  114. away\. \fBYou are never expected to resolve abusive behavior on your own\. We are
  115. here to help\.\fR
  116. .SS Trademarks
  117. .P
  118. If you think another npm publisher is infringing your trademark, such as by
  119. using a confusingly similar package name, email abuse@npmjs\.com with a link to
  120. the package or user account on https://www\.npmjs\.com/ \fIhttps://www\.npmjs\.com/\fR\|\.
  121. Attach a copy of your trademark registration certificate\.
  122. .P
  123. If we see that the package's publisher is intentionally misleading others by
  124. misusing your registered mark without permission, we will transfer the package
  125. name to you\. Otherwise, we will contact the package publisher and ask them to
  126. clear up any confusion with changes to their package's \fBREADME\fP file or
  127. metadata\.
  128. .SS Changes
  129. .P
  130. This is a living document and may be updated from time to time\. Please refer to
  131. the git history for this document \fIhttps://github\.com/npm/cli/commits/latest/doc/misc/npm\-disputes\.md\fR
  132. to view the changes\.
  133. .SS License
  134. .P
  135. Copyright (C) npm, Inc\., All rights reserved
  136. .P
  137. This document may be reused under a Creative Commons Attribution\-ShareAlike
  138. License\.
  139. .SS See also
  140. .RS 0
  141. .IP \(bu 2
  142. npm help registry
  143. .IP \(bu 2
  144. npm help owner
  145. .RE