What the EU’s new software legislation means for developers (github.blog)

submitted 1 week ago by sith@lemmy.zip to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 days ago

From a corps POV,

FOSS is free as in let 'em starve, not as in funding

Am i wrong?

[-] phase@lemmy.8th.world 2 points 5 days ago

Well, if I understand things correctly, it may address a part of this issue indirectly: corps are responsible of what they use. If a part is open source they also have the opportunity to fix the problem themselves.

Looks very nice to me.

[-] Rogue@feddit.uk 2 points 5 days ago

Indeed, that's why I use the AGPL license. Corporations hate it because it forces them to give back.

[-] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 days ago

it's free as in go pound sand if you aren't going to fund maintainers

it doesn't force them to do anything until devs refuse to work for any company that doesn't.

i'm with you on agplv3+. The copyright recognition document comes before the resume.

[-] MITM0@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

What do you think of FUTO's "Source First" Licence ?

[-] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago

Can you post a link.

Not familar with it, but will read it if you point me in the right direction

[-] MITM0@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Here are some links:-

Have fun :-)

[-] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

I read all 3.

The critic has been tricked. He is naive nice person. And therein lies the rub. He is dwelling on rebutalling the bullshit not realizing it's purpose is to distract away from real issues.

He's argued twice based on nostalgia rather than on legal merits.

People may have legitimate reasons to want different terms in an open source license. The critic rejects this.

If the critic has nothing to add to the conversation, he should go pound sand. The adults are capable of ripping systems apart and understand how to pieces fit back together and can customizing them without deviating from FOSS and OSD philosophy.

Go with aGPLv3. FUTOs nonsense nonpoints don't help in the least.

Real issues like pay only in Monero to the maintainer without any KYC. Not in encumbered methods requiring our time and risk of not being able to receive the funds. No NPOs. No middlemen that take cut.

Devs needs to unionize or form gangs. Society is currently telling us to get a job rather than maintain the packages world+dog relies upon. That's malicious, suicidal, has real consequences, and thus should be our #1 political issue. And we have to change society's focus by causing a rukcus, not submitting more resumes to create more web sites and smartphone apps or cloud services. Which is just purposefully pushing us towards a job creation program rather than a means to maintain world+dog's tech base.

There should be a systematic way for companies to pay towards those maintaining their tech stack. Lacking this, the companies can just say they are confused on how to go about paying devs. I can see their POV. That infrastructure needs to exist.

None of these points, violate open source philosophy one bit.

None of these points require yet another license. It's more about what direction tech community has to take moving forward.