this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2026
140 points (93.2% liked)

Technology

88301 readers
2938 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 33 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)
[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 47 points 3 weeks ago

Yes. LibreOffice is licensed under the MPL, which permits redistribution. Assuming that they noted it contains LibreOffice and where to get the source, anyway.

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 21 points 3 weeks ago

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that MPL is weak copyleft, so libreoffice can be distributed alongside proprietary software as long as they make the source of their libreoffice build available.

[–] Zarobi@aussie.zone 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

Hey he said binaries only, not the licence and source reference 😢

[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

No! Will there be consequences?

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 21 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Libreoffice is MPL, which allows distribution alongside proprietary software.

[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

That's interesting and distressing.

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 16 points 3 weeks ago

On what basis did you proclaim "No! Not legal!" if you're now surprised by the license? Misunderstanding of the license?

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Why? The authors of the software have specifically allowed it to be used in ways like this.

[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

I didn't think they were distributing it correctly, no mention of the licence or source attribution

[–] FurryMemesAccount@lemmy.blahaj.zone -4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's the whole issue with copyleft licences.

EDIT: non-copyleft

[–] Ghoelian@piefed.social 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What issue are you talking about?

BSD licenses, the MIT one and such allow proprietary redistribution, which I find repugnant.

Also yeah I wrote this in sleep-deprivation, I should have written "non-copyleft"...

[–] LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, are you including extrajudicial consequences in your answer?

[–] LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No, do you think guillotines, or is that too old school?

[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Maybe, I think guillotines can be impersonal, which might not elicit an appropriate level of emotional investment into any acts that are intended to be carried out.

Edit I broke the line of questions I'm so sorry

[–] popekingjoe@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

No forgiveness.