How to remove "Powered by ERPNext" from website

Sorry, you can’t do that. Read the license policy.

It’s open source. You can. Legally you can do pretty much anything as long as you redistribute the source and retain the license + attribution. :+1:

1 Like

Security by obfuscation doesn’t work. That is not sufficient to knock down your fortress of gold. :grin:

1 Like

Brian I agree with becoming an expert. You can’t sell a platform and keep your client if you are not an expert. Having said that i’ve been whitelabelling software for over 10 years and selling it. None of those came free. Open source isnt free either. I might white label it, but i’m not foolish enough to think I don’t need to have an expert on retainer. Is there a place where we can post things we want done. A platform like fiver ( which in this case would be 50 or 500) would be great. Any suggestions?

https://erpnext.org/erpnext-jobs

2 Likes

To my knowledge, the only site like you’re describing is what @flexy2ky posted above.

I understand that one should not remove the ERPNext link for obvious reasons.
If anyone wants to remove it, here’s how to do it:

Create a new custom website theme and add following directive to the stylesheet:

.footer-col-right.col-sm-6.col-12.footer-powered {
display: none;
}

Do not forget to set the new website theme as default

3 Likes

I know that it is possible to remove it, but come on guys… this awesome project is created by a community of amazing and helpful people…at ZERO cost to everyone.

Let’s just give them that tiny glimmer of recognition by leaving the logo in place as an acknowledgement of the great work they do.

7 Likes

add below code in website_script (Web Site ==> Setup ==> Website Script)

frappe.ready(() => {
    $('.footer-powered").addClass("hide");
});
4 Likes

refer this link,
Please watch it on youtube.

1 Like

I advice you append your label next to erpnext. Keep the license.

make a new custom app by using command

bench new-app {new-app-name}

then go to

cd apps/{new-app-name}/{new-app-name}/templates/includes/
create new folder

mkdir footer

add new file named footer_powered.html

nano footer_powered.html

and save the file and then install-app on the site

2 Likes

This app helps to do white label including removing powered by https://github.com/bhavesh95863/whitelabel

Very late to this, but I don’t see why there is resistance to removing it.

I want to use the platform and I will be an advocate for it. I would like to check out the ERPNext website publishing function, but I don’t see why my commercial enterprise needs to have ERPNext’s branding on it. It changes the aesthetic of my site and I don’t want that.

I have some specific stuff that I want to do with my site, that will involve paying someone to create a module to manage some fairly simple but specific pricing that no platform seems to do. It would be a huge boon for ERPNext if I paid to get that developed and then offered it as an add-on on top of using it myself. That’s real support of the community and the platform. I don’t see how wanting the footer to be free of the logo means I’m a bad community member.

Having that logo on there makes makes my company look cheap.

Though I don’t intend to sound like a dick when I comment on this…

Hiding that logo means you ARE being cheap. Why do the “paid development” guys get the credit? Surely the main team deserves much more credit than an add-on module?
The team asks little or nothing of us as “users”(no pun intended) - and trashing their logo is kinda more of an ABuser.
No offense intended - credit where it’s due!

8 Likes

I agree that the erpnext devs deserve all the credit. I also agree that some businesses operate on a particular asthetic look and feel, and the erpnext logo, although it does look good, it also might go against the business’s original look and be too out of place.

Not sure if the ERPNext devs would care about such a proposition, but how about offering two products, the original free ERPNext package that comes as is and a reasonably priced one that is whitelabel friendly (still with the condition that you cant claim the source as your own).

This way those who care for whitelabelling can do so and still support the devs to small degree financially, even if its a small one time amount.

Either way, I believe people will find a way to whitelabel the product so why not make a bit of money from those who would choose to do so by offering something that gives that requirement out of the box.

I think V13 is near white label friendly already with the feature to change the logo.

But I think the issue of replacing the logo and/or Powered by ERPNext has been over-flogged in the forum. If you want to white label a FOSS then get a developer to do it for you if you can’t do it yourself. It makes no sense to come here to complain about not being able to white label ERPNext when a developer could easily read the code and know what to do.

6 Likes

This is nonsense fanboy stuff. I am also a fan of the system, and I cherish your right to your own opinion, but I disagree that a footer advertising that the site is using a free platform doesn’t make it look cheap, and I reject the idea that wanting my site to be free of a such footer is a character flaw on my part rather than a business and stylistic preference.

I am not interested in being part of a cultish ingroup, or vilified by the same, and as I am someone who is prepared to pay for extensions to be developed that I know everyone else will get for free, that’s the exact opposite of cheap.

And to answer your question, the reason I think paid extensions deserve to be treated differently is simple: the entire userbase just turns up and uses the whole thing for free. But someone actually dips into his pocket to pay for paid-for extensions.

If a “cultish ingroup” is the correct description of people showing appreciation for the work done by a core team of talented individuals who dedicate their time and expertise to the greater good, then I guess I’m keen on cults after all…who knew!?

I do agree with you that people who pay shouldn’t be vilified - and it is not my intention to be a dick.
I am simply suggesting that the extension developer does not deserve more credit than the foundation team - so why do they get their name in lights while the core team get “removed”.

I applaud any and all contributions to/by the community. If anything, I am simply suggesting that it might be nice to add to the “E” instead of replacing it - which isn’t such a big ask.

To clarify…I am one of the “free loaders” who use the system (unchanged). I don’t have the skill or finances to offer much to the project, but I do try to help out on the forum if I can as an attempted compensation for that which I have gained from using it.

4 Likes