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

Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

chatsecure.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 83 posts

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#51

Post by wattson12 »

chrisdone wrote: post #45

“I realize the BSD allows people to sell my binaries and source but I do not believe it authorizes them to sell the source under a different license.” Er, that's the exact point of the BSD license. The GPL even allows selling binaries and source code, but not re-licensing. So the gist of this blog post is that you offered your source code under a license that allows re-licensing provided that your copyright and some…

According to Matt Gemmell's twitter (http://twitter.com/mattgemmell/status/235302914258792448) this morning the same seller had taken his open source split view library, stripped the author name from the header and removed the licence file.

It may not be the case for this library (given that he didn't need to under this licence) but it does suggest its possible.

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#52

Post by invaliddata »

I just looked at the license he referenced in the blog post: https://raw.github.com/chrisballinger/Off-the-Record-iOS/mas... and it is the GPL, not BSD. So all the discussion about BSD is moot (unless it was really licensed under a BSD style license previously, and was just changed).

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#53

Post by shared4you »

invaliddata wrote: post #52

I just looked at the license he referenced in the blog post: https://raw.github.com/chrisballinger/Off-the-Record-iOS/mas... and it is the GPL, not BSD. So all the discussion about BSD is moot (unless it was really licensed under a BSD style license previously, and was just changed).

He changed from BSD to GPL just now: https://github.com/chrisballinger/Off-the-Record-iOS/commit/...

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#54

Post by jasonkester »

charlesdm wrote: post #44
chrisballinger wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you trust proprietary software to encrypt your communications?

Absolutely. Time to start charging for it - you've got something here. Might as well pick the fruits of your labor.

Amazingly, this (and the root comment up top) are actually getting downvoted. I hadn't realized the sentiment among open source developers against making money from their craft was so strong.

But it shouldn't be. We, as developers, shouldn't harbor any ill will toward the OP should he decide to pull the open source version and sell it for profit. We certainly shouldn't advise him against it or recommend an alternative open source license that better guarantees that nobody can make money off this excellent piece of software.

Geeks like us tend to have a natural aversion to making money by selling our work directly, as though it's somehow dirty or wrong in some way that we can't quite articulate.

But we need to get over that.

We have a guy here (patio11) whose job this normally is, but he seems to have taken the morning off so I'll do this in his place:

On behalf of the Internet, I hereby grant you, the developer, permission to charge money for your software.

There, you're good.

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#55

Post by jancborchardt »

jasonkester wrote: post #54
charlesdm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. Time to start charging for it - you've got something here. Might as well pick the fruits of your labor.

Amazingly, this (and the root comment up top) are actually getting downvoted. I hadn't realized the sentiment among open source developers against making money from their craft was so strong. But it shouldn't be. We, as developers, shouldn't harbor any ill will toward the OP should he decide to pull the open source version and sell it for profit. We certainly shouldn't advise him against it or recommend an alternativ…

The software being proprietary and if money is charged for it are two very different things. This case is about the former.

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#57

Post by intui »

bermanoid wrote: post #31
chrisballinger wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are relicensing my software: Regular License - $13.99 The regular license allows the use of the purchased item in a project for either personal or commercial uses, without the payment of any further fees or charges after the initial download cost. The regular license gives you the right to use the purchased items within 1 project of your own or on behalf of a client (commercial, personal, or non-profit). You or…

And what part of that is incompatible with a BSD license?

The license was not reproduced. Please read the BSD license.

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#58

Post by statictype »

jasonkester wrote: post #34

I think you're missing an important lesson here: Your product is more valuable than you think. This guy wouldn't have started selling your thing is it wasn't clear that it's something that people will pay for. Your first reaction when you hear that he's making money off of it shouldn't be how to stop him. It should be "Wow. I could be making money off of this. My advice: - Don't worry about this guy. - Put a price on…

You're assuming he cares at all about making money from this app and the only reason he didn't try is because he didn't know it was possible.

His app is free and source code is published on github. Maybe he wants it that way.

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#59

Post by campnic »

jasonkester wrote: post #54
charlesdm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. Time to start charging for it - you've got something here. Might as well pick the fruits of your labor.

Amazingly, this (and the root comment up top) are actually getting downvoted. I hadn't realized the sentiment among open source developers against making money from their craft was so strong. But it shouldn't be. We, as developers, shouldn't harbor any ill will toward the OP should he decide to pull the open source version and sell it for profit. We certainly shouldn't advise him against it or recommend an alternativ…

Let me see if this reaches you up on your high horse:

Not everyone gives a shit about making money from the software they write.

There are many reasons to write software. There are many reasons to not charge for it. Stop presuming to know whats best for the developer.

Re: Plagiarism of my open source app ChatSecure

#60

Post by statictype »

jasonkester wrote: post #54
charlesdm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. Time to start charging for it - you've got something here. Might as well pick the fruits of your labor.

Amazingly, this (and the root comment up top) are actually getting downvoted. I hadn't realized the sentiment among open source developers against making money from their craft was so strong. But it shouldn't be. We, as developers, shouldn't harbor any ill will toward the OP should he decide to pull the open source version and sell it for profit. We certainly shouldn't advise him against it or recommend an alternativ…

I know you (probably) mean well but you're missing the point and come off as fairly condescending.

Did you consider the possibility that the author already has a job that pays him extremely well and that the ROI he gets in spending time providing customer support/marketing for a commercial iOS app is actually losing money for him?

You should save the "you are allowed to make money" talk for people who are actually trying to sell software and doing it badly (Because they undervalue the work they created) instead of directing it at someone producing what looks like a labor of love and is not interested in marketing everything he has ever created.

Post reply on HN