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

Leaked source – CS:GO

lwss.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 117 posts

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#31

Post by ethanbond »

dizhn wrote: post #11
opan wrote: post #7

The title says "open source" but then goes on to talk about leaked source. Unless a clean room RE was done, I don't think this can be called "open source". I want the thing in the title to exist, of course, but at best this seems like the sort of thing that won't be legal and free until we're all dead. If anyone was interested in making a properly free CS:GO, they probably should avoid reading this post as it seems t…

This person is really confused about licenses and copyright. > Please note that this code is property of Valve-Software and any contributions that you make are considered a donation into the public domain.

Legitimately seems like a GPT-tier confusion. Just put all the somewhat-relevant words in a syntactically correct configuration and call it done.

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#32

Post by FileSorter »

Jack5500 wrote: post #13

This world view is quite perplexing, to be frank. On one hand, he urges potential users to switch to Linux, emphasizing its cost-free nature and the freedom it offers in terms of code and game direction. However, on the other hand, the code being used is stolen and leaked, thus infringing on the original creator's copyright. Additionally, the repository's license claims that all contributions are considered public do…

Checking his github account was no surprise to me. Of course it was loaded with cheats for multiplayer games.

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#33

Post by ramshanker »

orra wrote: post #15
opan wrote: post #7

The title says "open source" but then goes on to talk about leaked source. Unless a clean room RE was done, I don't think this can be called "open source". I want the thing in the title to exist, of course, but at best this seems like the sort of thing that won't be legal and free until we're all dead. If anyone was interested in making a properly free CS:GO, they probably should avoid reading this post as it seems t…

General point: Clean room reverse engineering is a common approach, from corporations keen to minimise their liability. Nonetheless, clean room RE is not a legal requirement: certainly not in the EU, nor AIUI in the US. The EU allows reverse engineering for interoperability. The EU allows reimplementations of APIs (as does the US). The EU also explicitly allows decompilation, where necessary.

That will be helpful with my open source projects. Thanks.

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#34

Post by codethief »

Given the proprietary nature of most of the source code, I'm surprised the author's Github account hasn't been suspended yet. The blog post is from 2020 and everything's still online.

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#35

Post by antris »

wyldfire wrote: post #20
antris wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that's the difference between "open source" and "free software", no? "Open source", meaning that anyone can see/copy the source code, and "free software" meaning code that is licensed accordingly. I always thought that "open source" has nothing to do with what's legal and what isn't, it just means that anyone can materially access the code.

No. Both of these terms are well described by the relevant organizations [1][2]. And "source the happens to be public" or "leaked source" does not imply any particular license. [1] https://opensource.org/ [2] https://www.fsf.org/

I mean, you're not saying that this project is "closed source" either, right?

So what is it if not "open source" on the scale between closed and open? "Half-open source"? "Leaked source" only refers to the way the source has initially began to be distributed, not whether it's open/closed right now.

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#36

Post by mrob »

antris wrote: post #35
wyldfire wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Both of these terms are well described by the relevant organizations [1][2]. And "source the happens to be public" or "leaked source" does not imply any particular license. [1] https://opensource.org/ [2] https://www.fsf.org/

I mean, you're not saying that this project is "closed source" either, right? So what is it if not "open source" on the scale between closed and open? "Half-open source"? "Leaked source" only refers to the way the source has initially began to be distributed, not whether it's open/closed right now.

The middle ground is "source available", although that usually means source made available by the copyright holder under terms that don't meet the Open Source/Free Software definitions. I think just "leaked source" is the best terminology here.

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#37

Post by antris »

mrob wrote: post #36
antris wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, you're not saying that this project is "closed source" either, right? So what is it if not "open source" on the scale between closed and open? "Half-open source"? "Leaked source" only refers to the way the source has initially began to be distributed, not whether it's open/closed right now.

The middle ground is "source available", although that usually means source made available by the copyright holder under terms that don't meet the Open Source/Free Software definitions. I think just "leaked source" is the best terminology here.

Ah, found it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software

I see, never heard of that term. Still wish there was a term that encompassed all software that has publically available source code. I thought "open source" was it. The literal meaning of the term aligns so beautifully with it.

Re: Leaked source – CS:GO

#40

Post by scott_w »

orra wrote: post #15
opan wrote: post #7

The title says "open source" but then goes on to talk about leaked source. Unless a clean room RE was done, I don't think this can be called "open source". I want the thing in the title to exist, of course, but at best this seems like the sort of thing that won't be legal and free until we're all dead. If anyone was interested in making a properly free CS:GO, they probably should avoid reading this post as it seems t…

General point: Clean room reverse engineering is a common approach, from corporations keen to minimise their liability. Nonetheless, clean room RE is not a legal requirement: certainly not in the EU, nor AIUI in the US. The EU allows reverse engineering for interoperability. The EU allows reimplementations of APIs (as does the US). The EU also explicitly allows decompilation, where necessary.

In a general sense, yes. However, I really don’t see how this would fall into that category. It looks like someone has a copy illegitimately and is trying to reimplement it.
Post reply on HN