Live data from Hacker News

AWS forked my project and launched it as its own service

twitter.com

111–120 of 673 posts

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

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because all the author wanted was credit, and there's no appropriate license for that. The 4 clause BSD license has dropped out of favor for several good reasons and nothing else has taken its place.

I haven’t been keeping up with what licenses are popular, but I’m curious about this because The BSD license was my favorite a few decades ago. Can you please elaborate why it dropped out of favor?

The BSD license is still popular, but in its 3 clause or 2 clause form, without the attribution clause.

The main reason it was dropped was because it created an incompatibility with the GPL. The other reason was because operating systems became an unwieldy mess of attributions.

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

#112
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Motivate them for what, though? Fixing your license issues? Where is the bad PR?

Edit: Those downvotes are not really giving me answers. Anyone care to explain the issue?

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

#113
> Oh @awscloud I really do :Two hearts: you! But next time you fork my OS project https://github.com/checkly/headless-recorder and present it as your new service, give the maintainers a short "nice job, kids" or something. Not necessary as per the APLv2 license, but still, ya know?

He is only nicely and asking for recognition/attribution while acknowledging that it's not required per licence.

I don't know why people have to take sides or be angry about it. Just as amazon was free to take his project and make it their own, he is Free to mention the fact that someone is indeed selling his work without even giving an open mention.

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

#114
post #62

I'm extremely disappointed to see how many comments on here focus on the very narrow legal questions and amount to: "Your license didn't say they couldn't." Open source software is more than a license and code. It is a community and the digital public square. And the Tragedy of the Commons is just as applicable to our public square as it is to William Forster Lloyd's common land. Either we as a community hold ourselv…

> Open source software is more than a license and code. It is a community and the digital public square.

Unfortunately, there's absolutely nothing about the OSS community that actually instills this mantra in people. I like to think that I also see OSS as a community and digital public square, but there's no universality to that philosophy.

> Either we as a community hold ourselves and others within our community to a higher standard than the text of a license, or licenses will inevitably become increasingly restrictive in the future, to the detriment of all.

There's just no way that the community will ever do this because there are inherently conflicting incentives to participating in OSS. If you tried to explicitly motivate people to do this, you'd immediately get pushback from the individualistic elements of the community that don't want to participate in something that they feel is politically motivated or that Amazon did nothing wrong.

OSS is a great thing that has tremendously benefited the industry, but the idealism of a community acting together without any consequences or incentives to do so is truly folly. As much as I wish OSS had more of a true community feel to it (and I think there are little pockets where this is tangibly felt), OSS largely exists to provide tools for commercial software development. Those people are out to build businesses and accrue wealth, not fortify the OSS community. I'm sure there are people that actually work to accomplish both, but the vast majority of founders and companies I've worked for in my career don't see OSS as a community. They see it as a giant puzzle box where each piece is an OSS project and their goal is connect pieces together in order to sell a product to somebody. Get acquired/IPO and you've solved the puzzle.

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

#115

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

This is analogous to "hey, fella, I have a First Amendment protects right to be a manipulative, sociopathic liar" - it's true, and it doesn't invalidate people complaining about your behavior.

AWS did something rude, unprofessional, and indicative of bad OSS citizenship. The fact that the lawyers can sign off on it is irrelevant.

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

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that licenses are able to be written and rewritten right? If someone wanted attribution, someone could hire a lawyer and make a license (or make an edit/fork of an existing license) that does what someone needs. Giving attribution (and monetary compensation) to the lawyers who make open source licensing function is also a thing.

I'm not sure most companies would touch software with a nonstandard license like that though.

The author needs to decide what's more important then, getting a pat on the back, or contributing to OSS. It's pretty crappy using a permissive license so companies are willing to use the software, then trying to make them look bad for not following unwritten rules.

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

#118

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…

You want to make permissive licenses illegal or what? That's ridiculous.

Pick something like the MariaDB or CockroachDB license if you don't want Amazon to provide a hosted version of your software.

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

#119
post #62

I'm extremely disappointed to see how many comments on here focus on the very narrow legal questions and amount to: "Your license didn't say they couldn't." Open source software is more than a license and code. It is a community and the digital public square. And the Tragedy of the Commons is just as applicable to our public square as it is to William Forster Lloyd's common land. Either we as a community hold ourselv…

Corporations have nothing to do with community or people or ethical standards or environmental stuff or privacy. For a company an open source license is nothing else than the code and a license. For them, this is a very narrow legal question.

Corporations does not care about much but shareholders' interests. If you want to change that, you need to come up with a different system than capitalism, which encourages the standards you want to see.

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

#120
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like they could have added the owner's name.

no? why would they? they are complying with everything dude asked for and mind reading is not in mandatory training as of yet. if you want a nod if used as a part of a software, just add it!

It's good practice to cite your sources. Even if you're strictly legal, being ethical doesn't hurt.
Post reply on HN