4 ms·

This is only valid as long as the project remains GPL licensed. Musegroup has a new CLA and said that they made it sign to all past contributors, which allows t

by Hamcha 5y ago

This is only valid as long as the project remains GPL licensed. Musegroup has a new CLA and said that they made it sign to all past contributors, which allows them the right to relicense the product as they fit. While the fact that their privacy policy/telemetry infringes on the GPL (since it restricts use for people under 13) might not be enough to warrant a license change (though I guess it should? It's infringing it after all), they have their hands permanently on the rug we're all standing on and they can pull it whenever they want. Popular example of this happening is Aseprite, it was relicensed from GPL to EULA. The code is still open source, but the FOSS fork cannot just take the new changes and port them over.

neltnerb 5y ago
If they do this, and improve the program enough, then it seems like a reasonable outcome that in exchange for using non-GPL versions of the code you have to agree to their tracking. And if the people that are now freely contributing code to that project to handle audio decide that they don't want their changes to be licensed in a proprietary way, well, we get a new LibreOffice... people maintaining GPL software for free/cheap seems a lot more likely than maintaining software that is proprietary and owned by some company that is uninterested in sharing the improvements they submit.
nemetroid 5y ago
> Musegroup has a new CLA and said that they made it sign to all past contributors, which allows them the right to relicense the product as they fit. Wow, adding a CLA is much more egregious than adding telemetry. I'm disappointed that it hasn't received nearly as much attention on HN. I wish they'd gone for a DCO. https://drewdevault.com/2021/04/12/DCO.html https://drewdevault.com/2021/04/12/DCO.html