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

Winamp Legacy player source code

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 345 posts

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#71

Post by trehalose »

kube-system wrote: post #58
squarefoot wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting to see how would this play out in case of a lawsuit against an user who doesn't honor their license because it clashes with GH one. Anyway, that code has already been swallowed by some AI that will reorganize it, split in functional blocks and regurgitate it elsewhere someday, so too late for them to complain.

The GitHub ToS is not a software license. It is the terms for using the GitHub service. The penalty for breaking it is that your GitHub services might be terminated, not that they can somehow relicense your software.

This part of the ToS explicitly does grant such a license to other GitHub users.

> If you set your pages and repositories to be viewed publicly, you grant each User of GitHub a nonexclusive, worldwide license to use, display, and perform Your Content through the GitHub Service and to reproduce Your Content solely on GitHub as permitted through GitHub's functionality (for example, through forking).

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#72

Post by dncornholio »

blue_cadet_3 wrote: post #41
dncornholio wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody said anything about open source

Their official blog post does https://winamp.com/press/winamp-open-source-code

It does not. It open-source only in it's URL which has no semantic value if you read the article.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#73

Post by [deleted] »

elashri wrote: post #50
xx_ns wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems to go against GitHub's own ToS[1]: > By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and "fork" your repositories (this means that others may make their own copies of Content from your repositories in repositories they control). [1] https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-t...

It is interesting that in a hypothetical scenario if someone did fork it and then thes goes to court. Which licence would take precedence here?

[deleted]

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#74

Post by Dalewyn »

scblock wrote: post #22

Source-available but certainly not open source. "You are granted the right to view, access, and study the source code of the software. You are granted the right to Modify the software for private use only." "No Distribution of Modified Versions: You may not distribute modified versions of the software, whether in source or binary form." "No Forking: You may not create, maintain, or distribute a forked version of the…

If I can read the code, it's open source.

What you're complaining about is free source code, which this probably is not.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#75

Post by thomastjeffery »

xx_ns wrote: post #43
eminence32 wrote: post #12

Open sourcing is always good, because maybe you can learn some things by reading it. Also, Winamp Legacy is a fairly important piece of software, so having an archive of its source is a great thing. But the restrictions on the source are interesting. To quote the license file: * No Distribution of Modified Versions: You may not distribute modified versions of the software, whether in source or binary form. * No Forki…

This seems to go against GitHub's own ToS[1]: > By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and "fork" your repositories (this means that others may make their own copies of Content from your repositories in repositories they control). [1] https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-t...

IANAL...

By creating an account on GitHub, you agree to this license. That seems like a pretty strong precedent for precedence.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#76

Post by [deleted] »

eminence32 wrote: post #12

Open sourcing is always good, because maybe you can learn some things by reading it. Also, Winamp Legacy is a fairly important piece of software, so having an archive of its source is a great thing. But the restrictions on the source are interesting. To quote the license file: * No Distribution of Modified Versions: You may not distribute modified versions of the software, whether in source or binary form. * No Forki…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN