Earlier quoted context omitted.
Simple. Distributing MIT-licensed code without the original license disclosure is theft.
But both included the MIT license
The copyright notice is what must be included. The license states this very clearly.
How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
31–40 of 61 posts
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's exactly what I said - that was the only infraction. What part of my comment are you disagreeing with?? Copyright infringement is not theft.
Simple. Distributing MIT-licensed code without the original license disclosure is theft.
And downloading a scientific paper is theft too.
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hanselman is another shill. I was exceptionally intimate with the .NET team at one point. It is literally the case that they have devised a system where code is stolen, or poached, by the younger engineers and then "cleaned up" by "senior" devs. Senior devs then take the credit and bonus and things like that. Microsoft changed how bonuses are given out internally. It's literally a money slider that is arbitrarily set…
o_O
HE KNOWS
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Without a doubt, stealing code like this is against policies at Microsoft.
So, someone should be fired for violation of these (serious) policies?
If what the author says is true then yes. Unfortunately they really bungled their case by trying to reach out through unofficial channels first.
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#35The developer’s twitter pic is distracting. He has a point but I have a hard time taking him seriously. That’s just me being an old man i guess.
Homosexuals are people, just like you and me.
Mildly distracting displays of sexuality aren't limited to - nor excused by - any orientation.
You can tell the parent poster to get over it without passive aggressively accusing them of homophobia.
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is one of the very few things they are required to do. Following the clauses in the MIT license is not really rocket surgery.
That's exactly what I said - that was the only infraction. What part of my comment are you disagreeing with?? Copyright infringement is not theft.
[deleted]
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#37What happened was truly awful, but I don't think it's fair to blame MSFT when probably what happened was a few employees trying to take all credit for code they didn't write. From the thread it seems that he did not reach out to MSFT via any official channels and only informed "people he knew at MSFT".
Under the principle-agent relationship (the concept, not the legal definition), I do think it's fair to blame Microsoft if they don't remedy this soon.
Out of curiosity, who _would_ the right person to contact at Microsoft be? In my experience public channels exist to isolate the rest of an organization from having to deal with the outside (including complaints about bad behavior).
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#38The developer’s twitter pic is distracting. He has a point but I have a hard time taking him seriously. That’s just me being an old man i guess.
thicc
Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#39Re: How Microsoft stole my code and then spit on it
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is one of the very few things they are required to do. Following the clauses in the MIT license is not really rocket surgery.
That's exactly what I said - that was the only infraction. What part of my comment are you disagreeing with?? Copyright infringement is not theft.
To be clear Copyright infringement is a crime