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

TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 543 posts

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#111

Post by markus_zhang »

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #103
markus_zhang wrote: post #94

Open source software license should include a clause saying that it is mandatory for commercial users to pay a certain amount of contribution annually, let's say 0.01% of gross revenue? So if they find it too expensively they can simply turn away and build their own, which is good for whoever get the chance to do some lower level programming, and if they find it OK the open source authors/maintainers can get some goo…

the goal of free software is _freedom_. money has nothing to do with any of it.

You can have both IMHO.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#112

Post by VWWHFSfQ »

endisneigh wrote: post #55

People expecting OBS to get millions from this are naïve. Almost certainly TikTok will change the software to just use OBS independently to avoid the issue. If OBS wants money they should use a dual license.

did anybody say OBS wanted millions?

> Almost certainly TikTok will change the software to just use OBS independently to avoid the issue.

this is a perfectly acceptable outcome.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#113

Post by r1ch »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #100
r1ch wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OBS developer here. It doesn't "install OBS in the background". They ship several executables as part of their software that contain code derived from OBS and there is no offer of source code. They're currently in violation of the GPL, but per our GPL Cooperation Commitment we are trying to work this out with them privately.

Thanks for the clarification. Is there anywhere where this is written up more clearly? Even on Twitter? Would be good to circulate a more clear explanation of what's going on.

Not at the moment, we're trying to resolve it in private. Similar to how the Streamlabs situation unfolded, we don't want to "go public" until all other options have been exhausted, though it's looking like this choice may be out of our hands.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#114

Post by PragmaticPulp »

criddell wrote: post #108
oliwarner wrote: post #70

It's concerning how many self-labelled software engineers on Twitter are chipping in with comments like "it's open source so it's fair game" or "they just need to add attribution".

It might not be like this everywhere, but in the US all software engineers are self-labelled. It's not like medical doctor (MD) or professional engineer (PE) where the title actually implies some license to practice.

Common misconception, but Software Engineer is actually a licensed profession in many states (with vague industry exemptions): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering_professio...

But virtually nobody does it. The NCEES even abandoned their Software Engineer licensing exam a few years ago because nobody was taking it.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#115

Post by VWWHFSfQ »

markus_zhang wrote: post #111
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the goal of free software is _freedom_. money has nothing to do with any of it.

You can have both IMHO.

sure but they're not compelled by the license itself. They are compelled to pay for the software in the form of hiring developers to work on it, donating to the foundation behind it, etc. Companies like Red Hat have done this very successfully for a long time because they prefer to keep the supply chain feeding the lifeblood of their enterprise healthy.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#116

Post by dodgepong »

ghusbands wrote: post #75
bilbo0s wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, it's not even clear to me that paying would rectify the legal issue with respect to the GPL. It's an amalgamation of source contributions over time. Any one contributor could, in theory, refuse any consideration other than an open sourcing of the software. Of course, now I think about it, that could be an easy problem to fix. They say every man has a number.

Almost all relicensing efforts are actually most hindered by not being able to contact people. If you can't contact someone who holds the copyright to something, you can't change the licensing rights over it. A lot of projects have copyright assignment, to allow for relicensing. They typically ask for you to assign copyright to them or to a company they control, so that they can still relicense as they see fit, in fu…

It's worth noting that if someone can't be contacted, the maintainers aren't out of luck yet. If the contribution is deleted (and then possibly reimplemented later by someone with whom the project _is_ in contact) then the issue is resolved. It can be a lot of work, though, depending on the size and importance of the contribution, and reimplementing the code in a way that doesn't derive from the original submission can be difficult or ambiguous.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#117

Post by criddell »

BusyLurker3K wrote: post #91
pshushereba wrote: post #11

China stealing intellectual property? If only we could have seen this coming!

This is a horrible take. A Chinese company stealing IP is very different from China stealing IP. Google was caught using IP from Sogou for its pinyin IME, but we don't say America stealing IP.

ByteDance is partially controlled by the government so I don't think your Google analogy is a good one.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-17/beijing-t...

https://qz.com/1788836/targeting-tiktoks-privacy-alone-misse...

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#118

Post by wolrah »

SergeAx wrote: post #64
jaywalk wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OBS is willing to work with TikTok to get them into compliance. That would either mean open-sourcing the software or paying for a license.

Is there a way to buy oneself out of GPL license? I beleive there's not.

The GPL itself offers no such option, but if the copyright holder(s) choose to they may offer whatever alternatives they choose. Many significant open source applications are offered under this model such as MySQL.

The catch is that the more copyright holders there are the more likely it is that someone who has contributed a non-trivial part of the project will not agree, in which case their work would have to be removed/replaced to allow for relicensing.

Large projects that have not required a CLA from contributors are effectively impossible to relicense.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#119

Post by wccrawford »

AustinDev wrote: post #85
r1ch wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Streamlabs violated OBS' trademarks, their fork has always complied with the GPL.

There were 6 to 12 months iirc where they did not distribute their source required by GPL. I have close friends on the OBS team.

If nobody asked for the source and was denied, they were not yet in violation. They aren't required to actually post it online. They can simply send it to someone when asked.
Post reply on HN