5 ms·

A note to Bumble, this makes me not want to work for you or anyone who is currently in a related leadership position at Bumble (ie: eng leadership, etc.). Given

A note to Bumble, this makes me not want to work for you or anyone who is currently in a related leadership position at Bumble (ie: eng leadership, etc.). Given the lack of supply in engineering the bad publicity is going to cost you more than any miniscule gain. edit: And I don't even publish OSS anymore but if you're willing to go after an employee for something this petty what else would you go after them for.

throwaway984393 5y ago
Same. They'll never hire good coders this way.
- AndrewSChapman 5y ago
  There are plenty of excellent engineers at Bumble. It is not easy to get a job there.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> but if you're willing to go after an employee for something this petty After reading more closely, it appears both repos are derivative works of pojects that Bumble (aka Badoo) owns. It says so in the README.md. They were also written while the author was employed by Badoo/Bumble. I don't think this is as clear-cut in favor of the developer as the comments would suggest.
- some-more-info 5y ago
  This is correct, MVIKotlin is based on Badoo's MVICore, and Decompose is a mix of Badoo's RIBs (and zsoltk's Compose-Router which is also transitively a Badoo-owned codebase).
- marcinzm 5y ago
  >After reading more closely, it appears both repos are derivative works of pojects that Bumble (aka Badoo) owns. Which Baboo has released under an Apache 2 license from what I can tell. Your comment makes it sound like they were proprietary libraries.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- AlexCoventry 5y ago
  They say they're "inspired by" Badoo libraries. That's not enough to call them derivative works, at least for copyright purposes.
  - PragmaticPulp 5y ago
    Right! But they were developed while the author was working for Badoo/Bumble. You can't develop something "inspired by" your day job, while working the day job in parallel, and then claim it isn't related to the day job.
    - mattalex 5y ago
      Why would it be a problem if they were related to his day job? Keep in mind the libraries he was inspired by are open-source apache licensed code. Your argument only makes sense if you assume the code was related to proprietary tech and not just a piece of code you find on the internet.
    - LightHugger 5y ago
      That only works if he wrote them during work hours. If he didn't then why would the company own it? Anything you do off the clock is none of the company's business.
      - hallway_monitor 5y ago
        Generally the company has a claim to closely-related work even if done off-hours. You can't e.g. clone your company's product off-hours, or even make a closely-related product without the companty having a valid claim on that IP.
        DarylZero 5y ago
        When the company releases that work under an Apache license, they do give explicit permission to everyone to do that.
    - White_Wolf 5y ago
- quadrifoliate 5y ago
  > After reading more closely, it appears both repos are derivative works of pojects that Bumble (aka Badoo) owns. It says so in the README.md. That is how Open Source is supposed to work, I don't understand why everyone is thinking that this is some kind of huge discovery. Since both the MVICore and MVIKotlin repos are Apache 2.0, Badoo could simply pull in any improvements from MVIKotlin in if they wanted. They could ask their ex-employee if there was any interest in Badoo officially maintaining the project. There are about ten other paths I could suggest that go with how OSS projects can and should work. None of them involve sending legal notices to your former employees to "transfer" the repos. All I'm seeing here is that some person at Badoo/Bumble with little knowledge of how OSS works and a lot of lawyer time to throw around has made this move, and lost them a lot of goodwill from potential future employees.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - chii 5y ago
    > That is how Open Source is supposed to work i dont know if you can claim this - OSS is not supposed to be unsanctioned derivative works of commercial software that is private. The company _could_ make it OSS, but an employee cannot, since they do not actually own the rights to make this decision. Perhaps Bumble was a bit heavy handed, but from the point of view of the law, they are acting within their rights to demand ownership transfer, or removal etc.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - pritambaral 5y ago
      > ... commercial software ... Commercial and OSS are orthogonal. > ... that is private It seems to have been released under Apache 2.0: https://github.com/badoo/MVICore/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/badoo/MVICore/blob/master/LICENSE > The company _could_ make it OSS They _did_
- some-more-info 5y ago
  It also appears that the original tweet about Badoo asking for the repositories has since been deleted. I wonder what the implications are, and what else there will be to know on this case later.
friedman23 5y ago
This is such a hilariously way to shoot yourself in the foot. Software engineers that work on open source in their free time are almost always extremely talented, and will definitely look at this news and never consider joining this company. Bumble just got added to the same list as Amazon of companies I will just simply not even apply to when searching for a job. edit: looks like there is more to this story than the tweets are suggesting. If this wasn't obvious, don't build projects that are derived from work you are being paid to do and don't do them on the company laptop.
- marcinzm 5y ago
  >edit: looks like there is more to this story than the tweets are suggesting. If this wasn't obvious, don't build projects that are derived from work you are being paid to do and don't do them on the company laptop. My point is that this is petty rather than if they can legally do this. They didn't ask for the repos to be taken down, and the projects the repos are inspired by are open source already by Baboo from what I can tell. I've found that companies which are petty about one thing will be petty about other things so are not good places to work.
vmception 5y ago
Open source means the code is available it doesn’t mean you have the license to use it and that is dependent on the license Your stance is basically akin to viewing source of a paid javascript template site and taking all the js because its all in plain text
- marcinzm 5y ago
  The Badoo/Bumble code was Apache 2 published on Github, and the code in question is also Apache 2 published on Github. So I have no idea what your point is.
  - vmception 5y ago
    How was the approval given for that license to be used? Did the company sign it over and then retroactively renege? Did they just notice that a core developer was their employee at an overlapping time?
    - marcinzm 5y ago
      Huh? The company made their code open source under a permissive license. A developer working there then built their own package inspired by that code on their own time. I'm not sure where ethically the issue is here. Many things are legal but not ethical. So while they may legally be able to compel him that doesn't mean their action isn't unethical and petty. Companies that do unethical and petty things tend to be horrible places to work eventually.
      - vmception 5y ago
        I think you jumped the gun trying to predict how this conversation would go I am asking exclusively about the legal circumstance And also stop acting confused at every response, this is a normal conversation where someone asks about the context and the other person replies with the answer, I skimmed the tweet thread but the background isn't familiar to me and thats what the point of the conversation is You are too tuned to expecting an adversarial comment to defend, when thats not the case at all
Fordec 5y ago
Same. I fully blacklist working for companies that do this.

throwaway984393 5y ago

Same. They'll never hire good coders this way.

AndrewSChapman 5y ago
There are plenty of excellent engineers at Bumble. It is not easy to get a job there.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> but if you're willing to go after an employee for something this petty After reading more closely, it appears both repos are derivative works of pojects that Bumble (aka Badoo) owns. It says so in the README.md. They were also written while the author was employed by Badoo/Bumble. I don't think this is as clear-cut in favor of the developer as the comments would suggest.

some-more-info 5y ago
This is correct, MVIKotlin is based on Badoo's MVICore, and Decompose is a mix of Badoo's RIBs (and zsoltk's Compose-Router which is also transitively a Badoo-owned codebase).
marcinzm 5y ago
>After reading more closely, it appears both repos are derivative works of pojects that Bumble (aka Badoo) owns. Which Baboo has released under an Apache 2 license from what I can tell. Your comment makes it sound like they were proprietary libraries.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
AlexCoventry 5y ago
They say they're "inspired by" Badoo libraries. That's not enough to call them derivative works, at least for copyright purposes.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  Right! But they were developed while the author was working for Badoo/Bumble. You can't develop something "inspired by" your day job, while working the day job in parallel, and then claim it isn't related to the day job.
  - mattalex 5y ago
    Why would it be a problem if they were related to his day job? Keep in mind the libraries he was inspired by are open-source apache licensed code. Your argument only makes sense if you assume the code was related to proprietary tech and not just a piece of code you find on the internet.
  - LightHugger 5y ago
    That only works if he wrote them during work hours. If he didn't then why would the company own it? Anything you do off the clock is none of the company's business.
    - hallway_monitor 5y ago
      Generally the company has a claim to closely-related work even if done off-hours. You can't e.g. clone your company's product off-hours, or even make a closely-related product without the companty having a valid claim on that IP.
      - DarylZero 5y ago
        When the company releases that work under an Apache license, they do give explicit permission to everyone to do that.
  - White_Wolf 5y ago
quadrifoliate 5y ago
> After reading more closely, it appears both repos are derivative works of pojects that Bumble (aka Badoo) owns. It says so in the README.md. That is how Open Source is supposed to work, I don't understand why everyone is thinking that this is some kind of huge discovery. Since both the MVICore and MVIKotlin repos are Apache 2.0, Badoo could simply pull in any improvements from MVIKotlin in if they wanted. They could ask their ex-employee if there was any interest in Badoo officially maintaining the project. There are about ten other paths I could suggest that go with how OSS projects can and should work. None of them involve sending legal notices to your former employees to "transfer" the repos. All I'm seeing here is that some person at Badoo/Bumble with little knowledge of how OSS works and a lot of lawyer time to throw around has made this move, and lost them a lot of goodwill from potential future employees.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- chii 5y ago
  > That is how Open Source is supposed to work i dont know if you can claim this - OSS is not supposed to be unsanctioned derivative works of commercial software that is private. The company _could_ make it OSS, but an employee cannot, since they do not actually own the rights to make this decision. Perhaps Bumble was a bit heavy handed, but from the point of view of the law, they are acting within their rights to demand ownership transfer, or removal etc.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - pritambaral 5y ago
    > ... commercial software ... Commercial and OSS are orthogonal. > ... that is private It seems to have been released under Apache 2.0: https://github.com/badoo/MVICore/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/badoo/MVICore/blob/master/LICENSE > The company _could_ make it OSS They _did_
some-more-info 5y ago
It also appears that the original tweet about Badoo asking for the repositories has since been deleted. I wonder what the implications are, and what else there will be to know on this case later.

friedman23 5y ago

This is such a hilariously way to shoot yourself in the foot. Software engineers that work on open source in their free time are almost always extremely talented, and will definitely look at this news and never consider joining this company. Bumble just got added to the same list as Amazon of companies I will just simply not even apply to when searching for a job. edit: looks like there is more to this story than the tweets are suggesting. If this wasn't obvious, don't build projects that are derived from work you are being paid to do and don't do them on the company laptop.

marcinzm 5y ago
>edit: looks like there is more to this story than the tweets are suggesting. If this wasn't obvious, don't build projects that are derived from work you are being paid to do and don't do them on the company laptop. My point is that this is petty rather than if they can legally do this. They didn't ask for the repos to be taken down, and the projects the repos are inspired by are open source already by Baboo from what I can tell. I've found that companies which are petty about one thing will be petty about other things so are not good places to work.

vmception 5y ago

Open source means the code is available it doesn’t mean you have the license to use it and that is dependent on the license Your stance is basically akin to viewing source of a paid javascript template site and taking all the js because its all in plain text

marcinzm 5y ago
The Badoo/Bumble code was Apache 2 published on Github, and the code in question is also Apache 2 published on Github. So I have no idea what your point is.
- vmception 5y ago
  How was the approval given for that license to be used? Did the company sign it over and then retroactively renege? Did they just notice that a core developer was their employee at an overlapping time?
  - marcinzm 5y ago
    Huh? The company made their code open source under a permissive license. A developer working there then built their own package inspired by that code on their own time. I'm not sure where ethically the issue is here. Many things are legal but not ethical. So while they may legally be able to compel him that doesn't mean their action isn't unethical and petty. Companies that do unethical and petty things tend to be horrible places to work eventually.
    - vmception 5y ago
      I think you jumped the gun trying to predict how this conversation would go I am asking exclusively about the legal circumstance And also stop acting confused at every response, this is a normal conversation where someone asks about the context and the other person replies with the answer, I skimmed the tweet thread but the background isn't familiar to me and thats what the point of the conversation is You are too tuned to expecting an adversarial comment to defend, when thats not the case at all

Fordec 5y ago

Same. I fully blacklist working for companies that do this.