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

281–290 of 543 posts

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#281

Post by ksm1717 »

humanistbot wrote: post #149
addingnumbers wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are misunderstanding this and claiming it's not problematic because the tweet in the HN link is idiocy. They show one URL in one installer script with an obsproject.com domain and conclude, from the presence of that URL alone, that the entire project is a whole cloth copy of OBS. That URL is nothing but a 302 redirect to the directx runtime at https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Download/confirmation.aspx?i... The…

> that the entire project is a whole cloth copy of OBS. That is a straw man argument. It doesn't matter what percent of the infringing product uses GPL-licensed code.

What if it’s one character?

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#282

Post by ipaddr »

criddell wrote: post #188
ipaddr wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. A degree matters much more than talent. If you can get a degree you can practice. The most talented person in the world with no degree can't. Some people go to places where their low talent but high cash flow allows them to get a license.

Okay, so for an MD a degree is necessary that's true. But an MD with a degree and no talent probably won't be an MD for long. MD at least means something. "Software engineer" means nothing.

Once you are an MD unless you challenge powerful forces in your association or hospital you are free to practice bad medicine as long as you can stay within some reasonable guidelines around billing and when to order tests. This gets exposed with surgery but is a lot easier with a GI doctor.

They both mean something. You have to dive in to get the real scope regardless. If you just need a title for your commerical MD would carry more weight around diet products and a developer around a new software offering.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#283

Post by estaseuropano »

andrew_ wrote: post #38

I'd like to see HN shy away from posting twitter threads as news. There's almost always a hard link to the source material, and twitter threads are filled with emotional, truncated, nuance-lacking, trite clips that more often than not do little to promote healthy discussion of a topic. The goal of quality here really is noble.

The same critique applies however also to Reddit and any other site with social comments.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#284

Post by bahmboo »

delusional wrote: post #182
yumraj wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably they are employed at companies who are themselves violating GPL and have seen this being done there.

How do you think companies end up violating GPL. Maybe sometimes it's a heartless executive, but a lot of enterprise software devs are completely unconcerned with licenses. If they can get their hands on it, the license doesn't matter.

We couldn't ship software until we cleared every bit of code flagged by a tool that scanned our code for open source. Most of the hits were for projects with a safe license and there were many false positives but all in all it was a great step in our static code analysis. I find it astonishing that a company of any size would skip this step.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#285

Post by kiddico »

AustinDev wrote: post #20

So people that have ripped off OBS so far and violated GPL include TikTok, StreamLabs (Logitech), and StreamElements. Any other people I missed?

I didn't realize streamlabs was logitech. Damn. Going to have to find a new go to wireless keyboard recommendation for media pcs instead of the k400.

Should also stop singing the praises of the Pro Superlight...

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#286

Post by adamsb6 »

criddell wrote: post #188
ipaddr wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. A degree matters much more than talent. If you can get a degree you can practice. The most talented person in the world with no degree can't. Some people go to places where their low talent but high cash flow allows them to get a license.

Okay, so for an MD a degree is necessary that's true. But an MD with a degree and no talent probably won't be an MD for long. MD at least means something. "Software engineer" means nothing.

There are a lot of incurious paint-by-numbers doctors in the US. Doing your job by rote won't get you fired.

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#287

Post by LambdaTrain »

tombert wrote: post #252
delusional wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you think companies end up violating GPL. Maybe sometimes it's a heartless executive, but a lot of enterprise software devs are completely unconcerned with licenses. If they can get their hands on it, the license doesn't matter.

I think a lot of software engineers nowadays write server software, where they can often be somewhat allowed to be unconcerned with licenses [1], since the actual binary produced from the code lives on the server, and is typically not distributed outside the company. As a result of this, I think there's this mass misunderstanding of how licenses work in the software engineering field. [1] With the exception of AGPL i…

A lot of companies do not hire software engineers to implement the system; instead, they contract it to third party (tech service companies such as Cognizant). I think some sort of auditing is done at the delivery, if they concern about the license. But in the context of Java web app, the enterprise software is usually built on dependencies under APA, so it should be of less concern

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#288

Post by BlueTemplar »

bahmboo wrote: post #284
delusional wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you think companies end up violating GPL. Maybe sometimes it's a heartless executive, but a lot of enterprise software devs are completely unconcerned with licenses. If they can get their hands on it, the license doesn't matter.

We couldn't ship software until we cleared every bit of code flagged by a tool that scanned our code for open source. Most of the hits were for projects with a safe license and there were many false positives but all in all it was a great step in our static code analysis. I find it astonishing that a company of any size would skip this step.

Well, TikTok is a Chinese company, so it seems safe to assume that it's just part of the culture ?

Re: TikTok streaming software is an illegal fork of OBS

#289

Post by jrm4 »

bogwog wrote: post #201
jrm4 wrote: post #74

Yup. The best thing we can all do is shine a light on it. I'm a lawyer and one thing that's important to remember in all of this is the interconnectedness of things, and being strategic about how to proceed is important. Shine the light everywhere. As in, one thing to consider is that some proponents of Free Software do not actually want certain types of high-profile public cases on the GPL even when they law appears…

> mostly because it could be really bad if a judge gets it wrong and sets something stupid as precedent. At this point, isn't precedent already set? There have been more than a few GPL lawsuits where the courts ruled in favor of the GPL. This wiki has a list ( https://wiki.fsfe.org/Migrated/GPL%20Enforcement%20Cases ) of them. Some of those are in the US, others in the EU. Not sure if US judges have to consider prece…

I'd say there's not "enough," and in a sense, precedent is never binary, like "yes or no?" The law having distinctions and extensions and so on. US will probably find EU law persuasive but not binding.

So broadly, I think at least part of the strategy is "don't wake the beast." You really don't want e.g. "Microsoft v. Tiny GPL guy" as a big case because the law is far from perfect and there would be a lot of potential incentive/influence in MS's favor. (True, you'd get lots of Amicus action from Mozilla et al, but that would probably not be enough)

Post reply on HN