• Captain Beyond
    link
    fedilink
    519 hours ago

    Not at all, really. Forking is fine and building a business off of it is fine (I don’t personally see the value in it but apparently Y Combinator saw fit to invest in this so what do I know). Where they fucked up was replacing the existing free software license with some “AI” generated mumbo jumbo, because they were “too busy building” to “bother with legal.”

    You didn’t have to “bother” with creating a license, because there already was one. No one in free software should be rolling their own custom license (GPT generation aside) because there exist perfectly good ones already.

    • @delirious_owl@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      It doesn’t matter what the license chatgpt spat out says. If they forked from a Foss base repo, then all of the code they make will be FOSS too. This is great.

      • @Markaos
        link
        57 hours ago

        No, they are just in violation of the original license. That doesn’t mean they have to comply with it by properly open sourcing the project. Generally it’s also OK to just delete everything.

        There were plenty of cases where commercial software included open source stuff in a way that violated its license, and the accepted way to fix the license violation was for the software/hardware vendor to stop using the violated project going forward. Usually they don’t even have to for example scrub old firmware downloads that improperly included FOSS bits.

        • @delirious_owl@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          110 minutes ago

          The damages causes to the developers are equal to the profits made by the company that took their code and made improvements to it, without sharing it upstream as legally required