61–70 of 135 posts
Thanks to Erin for such a useful piece of software!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to work at Rovio (the creator of Angry Birds). Everyone was telling the story of a talk given by Peter Vesterbacka, the head of marketing. When it was time for questions, a man from the audience asked what physics engine the game uses. Vesterbacka gives the correct answer, Box2D, to which the person replied with another question. "Why isn't it mentioned in the credits? And by the way, I'm Erin Catto, the creat…
To the larger point, do you know if Rovio did support/pay Eric in any other way than that hoodie? Angry Birds generated $500M [0], supposedly. I would also not be surprised if the Rovio developers, designers, testers, etc. who worked on this game did not get a share of that $500M pie - I actually assume they didn't. But still, you know. Dare I say it - what about "fairness"? :-) [0] https://gameworldobserver.com/2023…
To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the larger point, do you know if Rovio did support/pay Eric in any other way than that hoodie? Angry Birds generated $500M [0], supposedly. I would also not be surprised if the Rovio developers, designers, testers, etc. who worked on this game did not get a share of that $500M pie - I actually assume they didn't. But still, you know. Dare I say it - what about "fairness"? :-) [0] https://gameworldobserver.com/2023…
I find it odd how we frame fairness in regards to open source software. He licensed his software as MIT. It says anyone can you use it without owing the author anything. So how is it unfair? To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
That's what he was asking for, a mention in the credits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the larger point, do you know if Rovio did support/pay Eric in any other way than that hoodie? Angry Birds generated $500M [0], supposedly. I would also not be surprised if the Rovio developers, designers, testers, etc. who worked on this game did not get a share of that $500M pie - I actually assume they didn't. But still, you know. Dare I say it - what about "fairness"? :-) [0] https://gameworldobserver.com/2023…
I find it odd how we frame fairness in regards to open source software. He licensed his software as MIT. It says anyone can you use it without owing the author anything. So how is it unfair? To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the larger point, do you know if Rovio did support/pay Eric in any other way than that hoodie? Angry Birds generated $500M [0], supposedly. I would also not be surprised if the Rovio developers, designers, testers, etc. who worked on this game did not get a share of that $500M pie - I actually assume they didn't. But still, you know. Dare I say it - what about "fairness"? :-) [0] https://gameworldobserver.com/2023…
I find it odd how we frame fairness in regards to open source software. He licensed his software as MIT. It says anyone can you use it without owing the author anything. So how is it unfair? To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
It would be common decency to donate even a small portion of that $500 million, even if the license technically doesn’t require it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it odd how we frame fairness in regards to open source software. He licensed his software as MIT. It says anyone can you use it without owing the author anything. So how is it unfair? To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
If I made 500M$ using an Open Source library and didn’t send at least 1M$ to the author, I would be an objectively bad person.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it odd how we frame fairness in regards to open source software. He licensed his software as MIT. It says anyone can you use it without owing the author anything. So how is it unfair? To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
If I made 500M$ using an Open Source library and didn’t send at least 1M$ to the author, I would be an objectively bad person.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it odd how we frame fairness in regards to open source software. He licensed his software as MIT. It says anyone can you use it without owing the author anything. So how is it unfair? To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
Well there's this little pesky thing in the MIT license: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. That's what he was asking for, a mention in the credits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to work at Rovio (the creator of Angry Birds). Everyone was telling the story of a talk given by Peter Vesterbacka, the head of marketing. When it was time for questions, a man from the audience asked what physics engine the game uses. Vesterbacka gives the correct answer, Box2D, to which the person replied with another question. "Why isn't it mentioned in the credits? And by the way, I'm Erin Catto, the creat…
To the larger point, do you know if Rovio did support/pay Eric in any other way than that hoodie? Angry Birds generated $500M [0], supposedly. I would also not be surprised if the Rovio developers, designers, testers, etc. who worked on this game did not get a share of that $500M pie - I actually assume they didn't. But still, you know. Dare I say it - what about "fairness"? :-) [0] https://gameworldobserver.com/2023…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it odd how we frame fairness in regards to open source software. He licensed his software as MIT. It says anyone can you use it without owing the author anything. So how is it unfair? To be clear, I think that open source maintainers deserve much more, but I don't understand why we rarely inspect the licenses as the source of the problem.
Well there's this little pesky thing in the MIT license: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. That's what he was asking for, a mention in the credits.