Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

github.com

201–210 of 626 posts

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#201
post #178

The attitude in these threads always boggles my mind. When YOU, your teammates or someone else you know makes a mistake, then it’s just a mistake. But when someone at Microsoft makes a mistake it’s because Microsoft is evil and by extension so is the person who offended. “It’s a big company”, you say. They should have a process! And I’m sad to say, they do/will have a process exactly because of this attitude. Then, e…

No post body was provided.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#202
post #178

The attitude in these threads always boggles my mind. When YOU, your teammates or someone else you know makes a mistake, then it’s just a mistake. But when someone at Microsoft makes a mistake it’s because Microsoft is evil and by extension so is the person who offended. “It’s a big company”, you say. They should have a process! And I’m sad to say, they do/will have a process exactly because of this attitude. Then, e…

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#203
post #178

The attitude in these threads always boggles my mind. When YOU, your teammates or someone else you know makes a mistake, then it’s just a mistake. But when someone at Microsoft makes a mistake it’s because Microsoft is evil and by extension so is the person who offended. “It’s a big company”, you say. They should have a process! And I’m sad to say, they do/will have a process exactly because of this attitude. Then, e…

This is their process. Very hard to argue these are all mistakes: ippsample (Apache -> MIT) https://github.com/microsoft/ippsample/commit/938bff17c72868... huggingface-transformers (Apache -> MIT): https://github.com/microsoft/huggingface-transformers/commit... health-cards-tests (MIT changed) https://github.com/microsoft/health-cards-tests/commit/5649b... CUPS (Apache -> MIT) https://github.com/microsoft/cups/commit…

MS dev here. Thanks for calling this out. I contacted the GH@MS admins to look into this and to consider adding some safeguards to the tooling so this doesn't happen in the future.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#204
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since MIT has this line: > The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. MS would be in the wrong to redistribute this code without the notice that includes '(c) 2020 LesnyRumcajs' - however, just changing the line doesn't constitute copyright infringement or fraud if MS reverses the change and/or simply appends the original MIT license…

The "5 commits ahead" are literally only replacing the license and the readmes.

So the only part of the repo that is legitimately copyrighted by Microsoft is the Microsoft copyright notice? I love how meta this is.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I am not, and have never been a Microsoft employee. You can search online for my name / username to find my open-source contribution history, if you would like. I hope that sufficiently answers your query.

No post body was provided.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is their process. Very hard to argue these are all mistakes: ippsample (Apache -> MIT) https://github.com/microsoft/ippsample/commit/938bff17c72868... huggingface-transformers (Apache -> MIT): https://github.com/microsoft/huggingface-transformers/commit... health-cards-tests (MIT changed) https://github.com/microsoft/health-cards-tests/commit/5649b... CUPS (Apache -> MIT) https://github.com/microsoft/cups/commit…

(deleted)

MS acquired that extension, Don works at MS now.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The statement you tagged as “wrong” was: > The larger issue is that anyone using GitHub is donating their work for re-use without attribution through Copilot. Why is this wrong?

It is wrong as a specific statement about GitHub, because regardless of current practice, the legal theory for Copilot applies to any code anywhere, so anything that is publicly accessible would involve the same risk. It's not dependent on use of GitHub even if Microsoft has initially started their because it's easier for them.

So this sense of “wrong” is similar to “correct”.

Also, I don’t see how this is true. Code on my website is publicly accessible, but not in the public domain, nor licensed for re-use, unless I say that it is.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#209
post #178

The attitude in these threads always boggles my mind. When YOU, your teammates or someone else you know makes a mistake, then it’s just a mistake. But when someone at Microsoft makes a mistake it’s because Microsoft is evil and by extension so is the person who offended. “It’s a big company”, you say. They should have a process! And I’m sad to say, they do/will have a process exactly because of this attitude. Then, e…

Y’all are not entitled to the benefit of the doubt any more than obviously-evil companies like Facebook are.

For those of us that remember the “old” Microsoft, they are still obviously evil. Nothing they have done will change that view. Incidents like this prove that this zebra cannot change its stripes.

Never. Trust. Microsoft.

Re: Microsoft forked MIT licensed repo and changed the copyright [fixed]

#210
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(deleted)

MS acquired that extension, Don works at MS now.

You're right. Saw the reviewer on that PR but you were too quick and I couldn't delete my comment anymore.
Post reply on HN