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

AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 673 posts

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#101

Post by shawnz »

h0l0cube wrote: post #37
3pt14159 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. The conversation goes on as long as we like. Part of OSS is about trust and reputation. AWS could have really helped the maintainer with a single sentence and they didn't. It's like not saying thanks to the barista when you get your coffee. Not the end of the world, but it's still a touch rude.

> AWS could have really helped the maintainer with a single sentence and they didn't. It's not befitting a large enterprise like AWS to tell their prospective customers that they are just wrapping their infra around free software in their marketing copy. If that single sentence even slightly impresses upon .1% of their potential customers that they ought to spin it up on their own infrastructure, obviating their need…

Amazon's entire cloud business revolves around providing managed infrastructure as an alternative to self hosted solutions, so I don't think that is really a secret regardless.

Also, consider that they rely on having a positive reputation to attract engineering talent and also to continue to get third party developers to release their infrastructural code under permissive licenses.

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#102

Post by pjmlp »

cmaker10 wrote: post #48

Could everyone take a moment here and reflect on their hostile attitude towards an open source author who just wants to be treated fairly (in a moral sense)? My guess is that none of the people who are lecturing and gloating have ever written anything substantial. Shame on you.

I have, but all of it was behind commercial licenses, because there is idealism and then there is the real world.

As for the author, it sucks, but companies, moral and law, don't stand on the same side of the balance.

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#103

Post by pfdietz »

varispeed wrote: post #64
3pt14159 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. The conversation goes on as long as we like. Part of OSS is about trust and reputation. AWS could have really helped the maintainer with a single sentence and they didn't. It's like not saying thanks to the barista when you get your coffee. Not the end of the world, but it's still a touch rude.

The model where company makes money off of someone else's work without paying them should be illegal. Currently you cannot hire someone as an apprentice and don't pay them - you need to give at least the minimum wage. OSS is sort of a loophole where companies can obtain work without payment. I think this practice should be illegal and regardless of the license company adopting OSS solution should pay its contributors…

> The model where company makes money off of someone else's work without paying them should be illegal.

So, once an author is dead, it should be illegal to sell anything they created? Or should ownership rights in content for the estate last forever?

Your idea is terrible when examined in detail.

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#104

Post by tannhaeuser »

EamonnMR wrote: post #84
sheeshkebab wrote: post #29

Are there open source licenses that specifically ban major cloud providers from using software and letting others use it on Apache 2 terms? Specially license tailored against every one of them, by name?

AGPL tries to do this but it's otherwise similar to GPL rather than Apache 2.

AGPL in no way prevents anyone to use the licensed software. It just demands, like GPL, that modifications be made available to users, but in addition to GPL, extends this duty to the case where the licensed software is used remotely/as a service (rather than "distributed" to users for use on their own computer).

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#105

Post by boomlinde »

nicoburns wrote: post #27
frabert wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For big companies, there's no distinction between "morally acceptable" and "legal". Stick to a license where what's immoral to you is made illegal.

I don't think that's entirely true. Large companies respond to public pressure over things all the time. Some of the better run ones also take the initiative to do things ethically off the bat. If a large company is treating "legal" as "morally acceptable" then we should be calling them out on this, not accepting as part of being a large company. We should certainly also update legislation to force them to do things…

> I don't think that's entirely true. Large companies respond to public pressure over things all the time.

That type of response to pressure isn't necessarily of a moral nature. If your customers are boycotting you for not including skub in your product, your choice to include skub in the future could simply be an effort to maintain your customer base, regardless of what moral values skub (non-)inclusion represents.

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#106

Post by hashkb »

numlock86 wrote: post #52
jasode wrote: post #42

There are some replies in this thread that misunderstood the content of Tim Nolet's twitter post. (Probably because the short headline has pitchfork raising overtones.) - He's not complaining that Amazon forked his code with Apache license. He admits he also uses other open source with permissive licenses - He just thought it would be nice/courteous/polite/etc if Amazon acknowledge/recognized/credited/mentioned/thank…

> There are some replies in this thread that misunderstood the content of Tim Nolet's twitter post. > [...] (reasons) Well, then why go on something as big and public like Twitter and HN to post about it in the first place? Send a mail to the team of AWS and get in touch. I don't get the point of this tweet, either.

Fear of bad PR is the most effective way to motivate larger American companies.

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#108

Post by simonw »

code4tee wrote: post #97
jasode wrote: post #42

There are some replies in this thread that misunderstood the content of Tim Nolet's twitter post. (Probably because the short headline has pitchfork raising overtones.) - He's not complaining that Amazon forked his code with Apache license. He admits he also uses other open source with permissive licenses - He just thought it would be nice/courteous/polite/etc if Amazon acknowledge/recognized/credited/mentioned/thank…

If you read further down the Twitter thread you’ll see others point out that AWS actually DID acknowledge him in the release and thus his original rant isn’t accurate. He acknowledges that later in the thread. Of course the, now inaccurate, headline Tweet remains the thing getting attention.

I read the replies and I didn't see that tweet - can you link to it?

Or are you talking about how if you download the Chrome extension and extract it you can see him referenced in NOTICES.txt? https://twitter.com/maxibanki/status/1317071448322789376

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#109

Post by tryptophan »

3pt14159 wrote: post #15
curiousgal wrote: post #3

> Not necessary as per the APLv2 license The conversation ends there, doesn't it?

Not really. The conversation goes on as long as we like. Part of OSS is about trust and reputation. AWS could have really helped the maintainer with a single sentence and they didn't. It's like not saying thanks to the barista when you get your coffee. Not the end of the world, but it's still a touch rude.

>Part of OSS is about trust and reputation.

If trust and reputation were enough, we would not need licenses. The GPL is great and had the impact it did exactly because it forced people to do things.

Re: AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

#110

Post by jasode »

code4tee wrote: post #97
jasode wrote: post #42

There are some replies in this thread that misunderstood the content of Tim Nolet's twitter post. (Probably because the short headline has pitchfork raising overtones.) - He's not complaining that Amazon forked his code with Apache license. He admits he also uses other open source with permissive licenses - He just thought it would be nice/courteous/polite/etc if Amazon acknowledge/recognized/credited/mentioned/thank…

If you read further down the Twitter thread you’ll see others point out that AWS actually DID acknowledge him in the release and thus his original rant isn’t accurate. He acknowledges that later in the thread. Of course the, now inaccurate, headline Tweet remains the thing getting attention.

>If you read further down the Twitter thread you’ll see others point out that AWS actually did acknowledge him in the release and thus his original rant isn’t accurate. He acknowledges that later in the thread.

Thanks for informing us with the clarification. The original tweet was 11:16 UTC. This HN thread was submitted 11:23 UTC. That twitter reply showing the acknowledgement in "NOTICES.txt" was later at 11:54 UTC.

https://twitter.com/maxibanki/status/1317071448322789376

Post reply on HN