181–190 of 445 posts
Even ignoring all the legal implications, it's pretty damn rude to reach out to people contributing to open source projects on their own free time without asking for anything in return and offer them a few measly dollars for hours of work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a project name was trademarked, you might be able to get them for trading on that name, maybe?
Maybe, but if they make it clear that they're not sponsored or endorsed by the project in question, it'd probably be considered nominative fair use, at least in the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> then forbid it in the license Isn't this really all there is to say on this subject?
No, it's not. The software itself has nothing to do with taking donations on its behalf.
I do not normally rant, but tip4commit and its ilk are some of the most infuriating people in the world to deal with, since they're opting other people's projects into something that has all sorts of legal/taxation consequences and think that "we have no way to remove you once you get opted in" is an acceptable answer. I'd push complaints further up to GitHub, since I'm sure something in the way this works violates t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can there be taxation consequences unless you act to set up a bitcoin address and accept the offered tip? If you've done all that, I think it's clear you know what you're doing. If you don't do that, then the money (apparently?) returns to the project you committed to, from whence it came. The only way there could be tax is if you receive the money, and that can only happen by you deliberately becoming involved.
In the US, if a payment is "available" to you, it must be reported as income at the time it becomes available. Failure to cash a paycheck doesn't mean you don't owe tax on it. See IRS publication 525, page 2, "constructively received income": http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p525.pdf There's some fuzziness and legal room here but the safe thing would be to declare it as income.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those projects are in the public domain. If there are purposes that you don't want your project to be used for then forbid it in the license. When you put your contact information in the public domain and then complain about being notified when somebody has given you money, I feel like you're complaining just for the sake of complaining. Set up filter rules or don't put your contact information on the internet. If I…
> then forbid it in the license Isn't this really all there is to say on this subject?
These kinds of episodes are making me increasingly depressed. On one hand, I'm incredibly disappointed in the ethics and morality of some of the people who have latched on to Bitcoin. And sadly, I'd have to include tip4commit in that group, particularly since they are "opt-out" and yet have been spamming people after each commit [ubernostrum points out below that they aren't even "opt-out", since they're not honoring…
>As just one example of what drew me to Bitcoin, Bitcoin holds (or used to hold) such tremendous promise for the developing world, and to people who are shut out of traditional banking. Vastly overstated benefits. http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-133-t... First 20 minutes goes into detail on how useful Bitcoin really is in the developing world. In short, if you've got access to a data plan and a…
It's crazy to see how much time you, a UK citizen who finds Bitcoin only useful for buying illegal drugs (by your own words), invest in attacking Bitcoin. I thought your limit was Reddit, but now I see you are also spending time on other sites like HN under the same name doing the same thing almost as a full-time job. No wonder some people think there is a paid smear campaign going on against Bitcoin.
These kinds of episodes are making me increasingly depressed. On one hand, I'm incredibly disappointed in the ethics and morality of some of the people who have latched on to Bitcoin. And sadly, I'd have to include tip4commit in that group, particularly since they are "opt-out" and yet have been spamming people after each commit [ubernostrum points out below that they aren't even "opt-out", since they're not honoring…
The only reason HNers are pulling out the DMCA is because another project is (unethically or not) using their names to raise funds in a way that they do not permit. That has nothing to do with bitcoin. Like it or not, the pseudonymous (not anonymous) nature of bitcoin will always attract a high level of illegal and unethical activity. Many people will then use those activities, stories, and experiences to paint bitco…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"scores of established corporations choosing to accept Bitcoin" What percentage of these established corporations "accept" bitcoin through VC-funded startups (which are gambling on the possibility of rising bitcoin value), receiving dollars and never actually holding a bitcoin?
> What percentage of these established corporations "accept" bitcoin through VC-funded startups, receiving dollars and never actually holding a bitcoin? Basically all of them. No established company wants the associated risk to actually hold bitcoin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Giving money to open source developers. How parasitical.
Consider that some of the projects they collect on "behalf" of already have donation mechanisms in place, both from a technical and legal perspective, and would prefer to see those mechanisms used.