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

Post by numpad0 » Sat, Dec 25, 2021, 5:35 PM UTC

redthrow wrote: post #246

rdpintqogeogsaa wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're attached to your copyright: 0-clause BSD is a thing that exists[0]. Toybox uses it. If you want to throw your copyright out the window: The commonly accepted solution seems to be CC-0[1], which tries very hard to disclaim rights and limit liability in as many jurisdictions as possible, complete with a fallback license grant for failed public domain dedications. Because CC-0 makes some people uncomfortable d…

I wondered why more FOSS projects aren't using CC0 instead of "permissive" licenses like MIT, considering a lot of folks who work in FOSS are against copyright/software patents system in general, and most of them don't really seem to care about attribution. People who release code under MIT not only won't/can't take legal action but they probably won't even bother writing an email to the person who they believe viola…

Post by fault1 » Sat, Dec 25, 2021, 5:37 PM UTC

fxtentacle wrote: post #213

osolo wrote: 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…

In my opinion, this gets a strong reaction because: 1. They made similar mistakes in the past. 2. They didn't fix it for half a year. 3. They can expect strong financial benefits from making these mistakes. 4. They've recently burned a lot of goodwill by deliberately infringing licenses on a large scale when they trained Copilot. 5. They could have easily prevented this kind of mistakes. My summary would be that Micr…

Post by johncena33 » Sat, Dec 25, 2021, 5:39 PM UTC

osolo wrote: 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…

Post by numpad0 » Sat, Dec 25, 2021, 5:40 PM UTC

feanaro wrote: post #55

brianwawok wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.termsfeed.com/blog/all-caps-legal-agreements/amp... It’s legally important

Your text says it's not. What's legally important is to make certain parts of the text conspicuous . Using all-caps is one way of achieving this, but there are other options, such as using a different typeface, font size or colour.

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Dec 25, 2021, 5:41 PM UTC

osolo wrote: 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…