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

Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

boehs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 99 posts

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#61

Post by fsckboy »

ok_dad wrote: post #50
truthsocial wrote: post #12

Thank you for your request (routed through legal, which added a day or so of latency). Main issue is we don't have an automated pipeline to update the published tarball/zipfile from our internal source control system, so it has to be done manually, and no one has that as a specific task. We also review the source for IP/security concerns before releasing. We will probably add a quarterly task to update it, until/unle…

Maybe you should rectify this legal requirement rather than continue to flout it? Put your code where your mouth is and start producing your source continually, as is the requirement from the original developers. You wonder why people seem to hate MAGA folks: it’s because of stuff like this where you have a CLEAR duty under the license (or law in many other cases) and choose to ignore it, disrespecting everyone who c…

you mean continue to flout it. And people hate MAGA because of open source licensing? I don't think so.

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#62

Post by truthsocial »

db48x wrote: post #58
dbmikus wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious, does AGPL require actively publishing the source code, or making it available upon request within a reasonable timeframe?

It depends on how the program is itself distributed. For programs that users interact with over the network, the program must have a way to offer those users the source code as well, though it need not be located on the same server. Paragraph 6d: Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through t…

Which we maintain at: https://help.truthsocial.com/legal/open-source/ -- the issue is that had gotten out of date.

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#63

Post by bigfatfrock »

zja wrote: post #60

The post about hacking Gab’s AI prompt that they linked to towards the end of the article was wild: https://infosec.exchange/@bontchev/112257849039442072

Agreed, I was expecting semi-typical internet bullshit but the personal confirmations were amazing!

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#64

Post by ok_dad »

fsckboy wrote: post #61
ok_dad wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should rectify this legal requirement rather than continue to flout it? Put your code where your mouth is and start producing your source continually, as is the requirement from the original developers. You wonder why people seem to hate MAGA folks: it’s because of stuff like this where you have a CLEAR duty under the license (or law in many other cases) and choose to ignore it, disrespecting everyone who c…

you mean continue to flout it. And people hate MAGA because of open source licensing? I don't think so.

Thanks, not an English major. People hate them because they ignore the law and community standards, such as in this case, like I said. This is one example of many, but you know that and are arguing in bad faith rather than reading my words as intended. Don’t bother responding, or do and get the last words, I don’t really care to argue with trolls today.

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#65

Post by ok_dad »

truthsocial wrote: post #62
db48x wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on how the program is itself distributed. For programs that users interact with over the network, the program must have a way to offer those users the source code as well, though it need not be located on the same server. Paragraph 6d: Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through t…

Which we maintain at: https://help.truthsocial.com/legal/open-source/ -- the issue is that had gotten out of date.

So, you don’t maintain it. Irregular updates aren’t maintenance. Maintenance is regular and scheduled. Stop trying to weasel your way out of the law!

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#67

Post by db48x »

ok_dad wrote: post #65
truthsocial wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which we maintain at: https://help.truthsocial.com/legal/open-source/ -- the issue is that had gotten out of date.

So, you don’t maintain it. Irregular updates aren’t maintenance. Maintenance is regular and scheduled. Stop trying to weasel your way out of the law!

Not the law, these are just license terms.

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#68

Post by ok_dad »

db48x wrote: post #67
ok_dad wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you don’t maintain it. Irregular updates aren’t maintenance. Maintenance is regular and scheduled. Stop trying to weasel your way out of the law!

Not the law, these are just license terms.

Contract law covers licenses. Just because it’s not criminal doesn’t mean it’s not important to follow. Also, regardless of the fact this is contract law, do you think it’s okay to take code other made and use it without following the licenses? Especially for a rich media corporation? That’s shameful if true.

Re: Making Truth Social Comply with the AGPL

#70

Post by db48x »

truthsocial wrote: post #62
db48x wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on how the program is itself distributed. For programs that users interact with over the network, the program must have a way to offer those users the source code as well, though it need not be located on the same server. Paragraph 6d: Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through t…

Which we maintain at: https://help.truthsocial.com/legal/open-source/ -- the issue is that had gotten out of date.

While the open source community does actively try to avoid lawsuits, others have let their source code releases get out of date with their actual website before. Usually this results in intervention from a group such as the SFC, backed with very gentle and politely–worded reminders that lawsuits are possible and are occasionally necessary. I believe that they will also remind you that revocation of the license is a possible remedy, although one that they earnestly hope to avoid. Their goal will be to help you find a way to get yourself back into compliance with the license, making the lawsuit unnecessary. They’re pretty good at this; approximately 90% of organizations that find themselves out of compliance manage, with the SFC’s help, to get themselves back on track without involving the courts. You can read more about it at https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/ if you want.
Post reply on HN