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

461–469 of 469 posts

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

#461

Post by maratc »

schiffern wrote: post #460
maratc wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar actions can result in different verdicts. For example, an act of firing a gun on one end and having a dead body on the other can result in a whole variety of verdicts, which includes (but not limited to) “terrorism”, “murder”, “killing”, “negligence”, or “self-defense”. You can have several functionally identical cases — e.g. same gun, same ammunition, same wounds, etc. - and still end up with a variety of ve…

The difference is intent. It's the same intent in both cookie-stuffing cases. Thanks, I should have pointed that out before.

I hope you don't mind if I'll wait for the court verdict on whether it was the same intent or not. Courts usually give more substantiated verdicts with regard to intent when they review all the available evidence, which I assume you don't have (neither does the court at this stage).

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

#462

Post by schiffern »

maratc wrote: post #461
schiffern wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is intent. It's the same intent in both cookie-stuffing cases. Thanks, I should have pointed that out before.

I hope you don't mind if I'll wait for the court verdict on whether it was the same intent or not. Courts usually give more substantiated verdicts with regard to intent when they review all the available evidence, which I assume you don't have (neither does the court at this stage ).

Thank you for acknowledging, by omission, that you have no real counterargument.

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

#463

Post by maratc »

schiffern wrote: post #462
maratc wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you don't mind if I'll wait for the court verdict on whether it was the same intent or not. Courts usually give more substantiated verdicts with regard to intent when they review all the available evidence, which I assume you don't have (neither does the court at this stage ).

Thank you for acknowledging, by omission, that you have no real counterargument.

I’ll also acknowledge, by elaboration, that there never was a substantiated argument to begin with.

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

#465

Post by happymellon »

mcny wrote: post #379
happymellon wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that tiny blurb was all I could find, which doesn't really tell me anything. > The evidence presented is Amazon dot com affiliates walk on eggshells to avoid breaking Toss that Honey completely tramples on so at the very least honey is not subject to the same tos as everybody. However, Amazon dot com is very aware of honey evidenced by advisory warnings on Amazon dot com website from a few years ago. I don't ge…

It could also mean Amazon dot com has decided that it was not possible to kill honey and it was better to join them rather than trying to and failing to kill honey. I think it is already proven that honey does not automatically show the best coupons for its users. So how and when does honey decide to hold back? The conspiracy theory is honey decides to hold back when there is an agreement with the vendor. Now logical…

> I think it is already proven that honey does not automatically show the best coupons for its users.

I think so, however I'm not sure how you would prove that they do this knowingly, mostly what's been proven are affiate link hijacks, because thats directly impacted sites.

And why would companies offer coupons, they then spend money not showing?

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

#466

Post by DirkH »

fallingknife wrote: post #250
medo-bear wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

infringing on copyright is like stealing from the rich infringing on copyleft is like stealing from the poor its the difference between robin hood and government corruption

Said on a forum where 99% of the posters are rich. When I see drivel like this it reminds me to be grateful that I wasn't born with the narcissistic delusion to believe that my behavior is privileged and morally superior to the same by others. The height of insanity is seeing yourself as the moral arbiter of the universe.

I legitimately don't see how your point meaningfully connects to the comment you're responding to

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

#467

Post by DirkH »

iamacyborg wrote: post #208
medo-bear wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

infringing on copyright is like stealing from the rich infringing on copyleft is like stealing from the poor its the difference between robin hood and government corruption

A lot of folks creating unique IP aren’t rich though?

Consider a homeless person stole from a food bank to sell the food to make money - and nowhere acknowledged where the food came from or that others can get the same food for free; and moreover claimed "this is fresh food I have meticulously sourced myself!"

Everyone from the foodbank to other homeless people would justifiably be furious at this scam artist when they learn more. That's the morally repugnant situation we find ourselves in with Honey.

Copyleft infringement is perhaps better thought of as stealing from a foodbank than government corruption.

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

#468

Post by kube-system »

globular-toast wrote: post #447
kube-system wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not technically. GPLs requirements kick in the moment you make a copy for you own use, it's just that there aren't any requirements that apply under those conditions. But they'd have to take effect right away, otherwise you'd be illegally copying copyrighted software :). It is the GPL license that grants personal use without restriction.

You didn't make that copy, the person you got it from did. I don't need to be granted permission to run a program on my own computer.

Downloading is both literally and legally "creating a copy", at least in the US. [0]

> I don't need to be granted permission to run a program on my own computer.

Correct, you can run programs on your computer without permission. It's the 'loading the program on to your disk' part that you may need permission for.

[0]: https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html

> Uploading or downloading works protected by copyright without the authority of the copyright owner is an infringement of the copyright owner's exclusive rights of reproduction and/or distribution.

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

#469

Post by kelseydh »

hotdogbaines wrote: post #428
kelseydh wrote: post #374

Snopes looking real silly for this 2018 fact check: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/honey-browser-extension/

looks like they did a new piece about it: https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/12/30/honey-browser-extensi...

It's really shameful they haven't updated the 2018 page with this information.
Post reply on HN