Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lerna relicences to protest ICE

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 162 posts

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#31

Post by jasonlotito »

75dvtwin wrote: post #23

very unfortunate to have this in the license. I guess in the future, we will use our selective outrage, to decide which formulas / research work can be used and by whom. Jamie Build is welcome to establish charity organization to help, whoever he believes the victims are. Given current practice of economic prosecution of conservative voices, Technology folks who would choose voice their support for Trumps administrat…

> Given current practice of economic prosecution of conservative voices, Technology folks who would choose voice their support for Trumps administration, ICE, etc -- would end up loosing their jobs in the tech sector.

This is false.

> Just like what happened to javascript creator, Brendan Eich [1].

This is you rewriting history to suit your agenda. This is literally not what happened. Your source does not in any way back up your statement.

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#32

Post by exogen »

burfog wrote: post #11

Well, this can't be in Debian or OpenBSD. I like OpenBSD maintainer Theo de Raadt's take on the matter. He allows usage in baby mulching machines and usage for dropping atomic bombs on Australia: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Theo_de_Raadt

And? So what? OSI approved licenses are particular ends to particular means. They are not the only ends to the only means.

Theo de Raadt's take isn't automatically morally righteous. Honestly, it just sounds like a nineteen year old libertarian thinking "a-ha! everyone should just be able to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others! it's so simple, we've figured it all out!"

Some people want a better world, not just a more permissive one. Sometimes those things overlap! But not always.

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#33

Post by leereeves »

roblabla wrote: post #9
eindiran wrote: post #2

I'd be very happy if someone could present a counter argument to this: this is something expressly against the spirit of the MIT license and Lerna should not continue claiming that the software is MIT licensed. https://opensource.org/osd In particular, this seems like a pretty explicit violation of the "no discrimination against field of endeavor" clause. Here is the text of the MIT license: " Permission is hereby gr…

It's still the MIT license for other people though. Licenses are a contract between a licensor and and a licensee. OSS requires the Licensor to provides the license in a non-discriminating way, and some licenses, like the GPL, explicitly enforce this. But the MIT license itself has no such provision. You could license a project with MIT to user A, and not to user B. This is all just rule-bending though. I'm very conf…

It's not the MIT license for other people if it doesn't allow those other people to distribute it as they choose (including giving it to ICE).

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#34

Post by mirimir »

mberning wrote: post #5

This is a ridiculous thing to put in a software license and a completely toxic subject in general.

> completely toxic subject

I agree about "completely toxic". But it's the policy that's completely toxic, not the subject. I mean, separating babies from their parents? That is just fucking insane.

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#35

Post by jdminhbg »

roblabla wrote: post #9
eindiran wrote: post #2

I'd be very happy if someone could present a counter argument to this: this is something expressly against the spirit of the MIT license and Lerna should not continue claiming that the software is MIT licensed. https://opensource.org/osd In particular, this seems like a pretty explicit violation of the "no discrimination against field of endeavor" clause. Here is the text of the MIT license: " Permission is hereby gr…

It's still the MIT license for other people though. Licenses are a contract between a licensor and and a licensee. OSS requires the Licensor to provides the license in a non-discriminating way, and some licenses, like the GPL, explicitly enforce this. But the MIT license itself has no such provision. You could license a project with MIT to user A, and not to user B. This is all just rule-bending though. I'm very conf…

> It's still the MIT license for other people though.

But doesn't that imply that other people could redistribute to any of the companies on the list? So it's either not MIT, or it's pointless.

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#36

Post by jasonlotito »

dragontamer wrote: post #7

This is fundamentally anti-free software and completely against the point of the MIT License. If you want control over your code, you should use your powers of copyright more carefully. EDIT: In particular, whats to stop ME from grabbing the code, and then giving it to Microsoft? What prevents a particular individual AT Microsoft from downloading and using your code? And what enforcement mechanism do you plan if you…

> In particular, whats to stop ME from grabbing the code, and then giving it to Microsoft?

Microsoft not wanting to wade into that mess.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17865360

> And what enforcement mechanism do you plan if you ever discover that Microsoft is using your code?

The same enforcement mechanisms they were using before.

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#37

Post by jhanschoo »

Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #8

As usual, this is only valid if every contributor has agreed to the relicensing. Otherwise the project maintainers are infringing the copyright of the contributors by violating the license granted to them by each contributor. I see this all too frequently. It's scary the legal recourse people open themselves up to by not understanding licensing. That aside, I know very little about these companies involvement in "ICE…

Per my understanding, unless other wise stated, relicensing is still pretty much a fork; versions up to the relicense are still distributable under the old license. In addition, MIT permits forking under a new license.

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#38

Post by crankylinuxuser »

1. Put said line in license:

     The following license shall not be granted to the following entities or any subsidiary thereof due to their collaboration with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE")....
2. Hosts said code on Github

3. Github is owned fully by Microsoft

4. Repo invalidates itself due to using free goods paid in part by ICE, thereby becoming a subsidiary.

Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE

#39

Post by Benjamin_Dobell »

evil-olive wrote: post #14
Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #8

As usual, this is only valid if every contributor has agreed to the relicensing. Otherwise the project maintainers are infringing the copyright of the contributors by violating the license granted to them by each contributor. I see this all too frequently. It's scary the legal recourse people open themselves up to by not understanding licensing. That aside, I know very little about these companies involvement in "ICE…

> I know very little about these companies involvement in "ICE" and there's no references given. Here's a few sources: Microsoft employees call on company to cancel contract with ICE: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/microsoft/microsoft-em... Amazon employees demand company cut ties with ICE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/06/22... Tech companies quietly work with ICE as border crisis per…

Thanks for taking the time to collate these for me. Very much appreciated.
Post reply on HN