Live data from Hacker News

Winamp Legacy player source code

github.com

331–340 of 345 posts

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear that Github's ToS can do such a thing, is it? What gives them the right to overrule the license from Winamp to me?

A repo's license doesn't overrule GitHub's policy.

The implication of this is not what you think. Basically github can go after Winamp and say they violated GitHub terms that is it. Just because winamp violated GitHubs terms of service does not mean they lose their copyright rights

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Github ToS gives users the right to fork any public repos.

So someone steals my source code and posts it on GitHub, now i no longer have copyright rights? The duty is on the copier to ensure they are granted a license.

That's obviously not the case. GitHub even has their DMCA takedowns public. You can't redistribute copyrighted material unless it's under a license that allows for it.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#333

I remember hanging out in #mpeg3 on EFNet many many years ago and becoming an acquaintance of Justin Frankel while he was working on this. I had made a skin and even a few tray icons for him to use in the app, and some of them are in here. I can't remember 100% which ones were mine, but the punchlabel one definitely was. My name is in the credits too: https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/blob/0695744fd658c42...

I wonder if you would have linked this credits page had you been assigned the title "BREAST EXAMINER" OR "NUDE SCENES" like some others, haha

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#334
post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/third-party_beneficiary

Is the ToS a contract? Even if it is would the remedy to Winamp breaking it be modifying the license Winamp provides?

Yes, every ToS is a contract. As for the most appropriate remedy, that's for a court to decide.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#335

The only music player that wasn't annoying. Just did its job with a streamlined interface, without the clutter and clunky graphics that competitors thought was the way to go.

> without the clutter and clunky graphics Wasnt one of the fun things with that player putting random skins on it? Or am I thinking of a different one?

Yes, but the skins didn't rearrange anything (as opposed to some other players). It was just a different "texture". See: https://skins.webamp.org/

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#336
post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They expect people to simply ignore the license. And most people will. And they won't set their lawyers on any contributors. And the world will go on.

That’s not good enough. You can’t put out an open source project and expect to control the community around it to that degree.

Google does it with Go, Microsoft does it with VS Code. Open source cosplay, with or without an OSI-approved license, is rampant.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#337
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, I still use XMMS. There is also qmmp[1] for a Qt based player. And I think Audacious[2] still has a classic winamp interface, although it's not the default anymore. [1] https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/ [2] https://audacious-media-player.org/

Just curious, but on which OS are you running XMMS on?

https://www.salixos.org/

It's not installed by default, but it's in the repos.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#339
post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without the clutter and clunky graphics Wasnt one of the fun things with that player putting random skins on it? Or am I thinking of a different one?

Yes, but the skins didn't rearrange anything (as opposed to some other players). It was just a different "texture". See: https://skins.webamp.org/

There were winamp3 / modern 5.x skins which were freeform in nature so could be all sorts of shapes or not depending on what the skinner wanted it to be like. With 5.x still supporting the fixed form classic / 2.x skins as webamp & its skin museum support.

Re: Winamp Legacy player source code

#340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Winamp agreed to the ToS of GitHub by uploading their code to GitHub.

Doesn't that just mean that Github should be mad at them? Doesn't seem obvious that it actually gives me a license to do anything.

Pretty much all open source projects on GitHub rely on section D.6 of GitHub TOS (when you submit PR, it's licensed under project license and you have a right to do so).

TOS are not just fluff and paper, but legally binding. Granted, when there is a conflict between two conflicting requirements, it's never clear cut, but it's not just "GitHub will be mad."

Post reply on HN