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

uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 469 posts

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#261

Post by wizzwizz4 »

Brian_K_White wrote: post #219
tikhonj wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GPL does the exact opposite of copyright; the fact that it uses copyright to achieve that is just an implementation detail. If you believe information should be free to share and remix, you would believe that copyright infringement is not theft and that not releasing code is wrong. The fact that the proprietary code is based on GPL code just shows that the ex-Honey folks are hypocrites: they're trying to use copy…

The gpl sets terms, employing the right to set terms. The fact that those terms are not for money is the implimentation detail. The fact that there are terms that you are required to agree and adhere to, OR live without the goods, that is not. Just like the normal terms for money, your choice is you can take it according to the terms, or leave it. Not just take it and ignore the terms. It's definitely a special level…

> The fact that there are terms that you are required to agree and adhere to, OR live without the goods, that is not.

Uh, no there aren't. The GPL's requirements only kick in when I try to redistribute: that's why the license is in a file called COPYING. It's not an EULA: you don't need to agree with it to use GPL'd software.

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#262

Post by wizzwizz4 »

fallingknife wrote: post #256
notpushkin wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard an argument that people / companies would still pay for custom development, like they do now. It is a pretty weak argument, but I do see the point.

Sure, custom development could still be a thing under such a framework because there is only a single potential user, but can you imagine how catastrophically expensive that would be? The business of software development would be absolute misery to work in as the core skill would be to write such convoluted, impenetrable, single use code at the pain of being put out of business by source code copiers. Software would…

I'm with you until the final sentence. From my perspective, that's the current state of software development. Hundreds of megabytes of JavaScript and "assets" for what could be a 60KiB bundle of HTML, or a 500KiB Win32 program.

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#263

Post by belorn »

shwaj wrote: post #94

I know it’s not necessarily the same people, but it feels contradictory for this community to say “copyright infringement isn’t theft” when we’re talking about movies, but use the opposite language when talking about GPL source code.

There are very many differences already pointed out, so to add an other one, there is a difference between a company doing something at scale and for profit, and a private person doing something for themselves.

The people in this community that says “copyright infringement isn’t theft” do not refer to copyright infringement where people exploit the work for-profit and put it out as their own (feel free to find a single occurrence to prove me wrong). The word plagiarism comes to mind, which is morally and (depending on country and circumstance) legally a bigger crime than copyright infringement. The legal system usually also recognize that exploitation done for-profit and large scale should be considered worse and punished harder.

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#264

Post by imiric »

josephg wrote: post #222
twostorytower wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should also be angry at all these other extensions and companies, they’re complicit and just as bad. But the source of change needs to come from the affiliate networks, who dictate the rules.

The source of change should come from influencers - who shouldn’t promote this stuff. From honey, who shouldn’t steal money, lie about their business practices and steal people’s code. And it should come from Google and Firefox who allow extensions like this in their stores. And from consumers who install this crap. > So are there some problems with the affiliate industry? Probably. But calling Honey a "scam" seems c…

Unfortunately, nothing will actually change from the inside. This industry is rotten to the core, and companies will continue to exploit users and other companies as long as they can profit from it. It's not like PayPal Honey was some obscure company with no visibility. PayPal knew damn well what they were buying and how the company operates.

The only way this could change is if the tech industry is hit with strict regulations. But considering that governments are technically incompetent, and that they're either in symbiosis or plain bought out by Big Tech, this has no chance of happening. Especially in the US, where any mention of regulation is met with criticism even from consumers, and where Musk will be taking the reigns for the next 4 years.

Once this "scandal" blows over and consumers forget about it, PayPal Honey will either continue to exist, or will rebrand as a different company in the same industry, operating the same way it does now.

As for influencers: it's hilarious that you think any positive change could come from them. They only care about getting paid, and could promote anything that lands in their inbox. Hell, they're often the ones who scam their own audience. We're decades away from regulating that whole mess.

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#265

Post by benjaminl »

tantalor wrote: post #125
BadHumans wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Title is misleading. The original team behind Honey has created a new company that is doing this and not Honey itself which is owned by Paypal.

Do we know when Honey started stealing affiliate links? Was it after the acquisition?

[flagged]

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#266

Post by darthwalsh »

maxloh wrote: post #85
moonshadow565 wrote: post #46

I don't think you can copyright lists of publicly available information (iirc there was some case with phone numbers before). That being said, they also stole code...

Moreover, it doesn't seem like static linking to me. A similar example would be using a GPLv3 licensed JavaScript library in a website. What it implies to other HTML/JS/CSS code is controversial [0]. The FSF actually believed that they should not be "infected" [1], and the legal implications may need to be tested in court. [0]: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/q/4360/15873 [1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-fa…

The FSF question is about templates, but the chrome extension in question also seems to have copied nontrivial JS.

I don't think chrome extensions can be modified by the user; there's probably some integrity check. So to be GPL compliant they need to publish source files to rebuild the extension?

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#267

Post by notpushkin »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #262
fallingknife wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, custom development could still be a thing under such a framework because there is only a single potential user, but can you imagine how catastrophically expensive that would be? The business of software development would be absolute misery to work in as the core skill would be to write such convoluted, impenetrable, single use code at the pain of being put out of business by source code copiers. Software would…

I'm with you until the final sentence. From my perspective, that's the current state of software development. Hundreds of megabytes of JavaScript and "assets" for what could be a 60KiB bundle of HTML, or a 500KiB Win32 program.

Yeah, the reality is, our industry produces a lot of garbage right now. That wouldn’t change.

Still, there are people who care about quality, and some of them also share their work with others. Those people would exist regardless of whether there is copyright or not. The only difference is, we won’t have LICENSE files anymore.

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#269

Post by mathstuf »

iamacyborg wrote: post #207
mathstuf wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can still want much looser copyright. For example, 14 years by default, pay $$ to extend it, increasing exponentially each time (as compensation for stealing from the public domain). At least I'm willing to call extended copyright terms stealing if we're going to call format shifting and other personal use cases stealing.

> stealing from the public domain How is it stealing from the public domain if it’s intellectual property you’ve created? Do you also believe I should be entitled to a cut of your paycheck?

At least in the US, copyright is a monopoly on certain rights for a limited time. By locking those rights for an extended time, it is stretching that definition. The time to benefit from your creations is in that time window. That goes for my creations, yours, and everyone else too. Public domain is patient, but I don't think it is worth depriving it of moderately older works with which others can start to use as a foundation to build upon.

Re: uBlock Origin GPL code being stolen by team behind Honey browser extension

#270

Post by lizknope »

matt3210 wrote: post #160

It wouldn’t surprise me if most companies steal GPL code. When code is closed source, how can anyone know?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Leg...

There are cases here where companies used GPL code without releasing their changes.

How do licenses of a source code check if the people using their code is complying with the license it uses?

https://www.reddit.com/r/embedded/comments/18gie6l/how_do_li...

The fastest way is often to just run the "Strings" program on the software. Often it will dump out a bunch of strings that match those in the Open Source project: Error Messages, Logging messages, etc. Sometimes if they're really sloppy it'll spit out the name of the GPL program/library directly and a version number.

I often add magic arrays to my code. So.. if I find them in a binary blob...

Have there been any lawsuits involving breach of open source licences?

https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/11452/have-th...

Post reply on HN