3 ms·

I would also say No Source Code == No Copyright, we should require companies escrow their software source code so that when their software becomes abandonware,

by pabs3 4y ago

I would also say No Source Code == No Copyright, we should require companies escrow their software source code so that when their software becomes abandonware, users can continue development of it. This would also get closer to a right to repair software.

mschuster91 4y ago
Add on that No Tooling == No Copyright. Source code is one thing, but particularly for large projects or ones ... creatively abusing compiler features depending on a specific version, you're straight fucked without the build environment used. And that's not all... there is one elephant left in the room: code signing keys. Like, what is it worth when you have the source code and the build environment, but the computer running it is locked down hard by an actually capable TEE? For now, a lot of these can be bypassed by the arcane art of power glitching, but that won't be the case forever - and some console makers, like Microsoft or Sony prior to removing Linux from the PS3, took away the incentive many elite hackers had to make homebrew possible so it's a good question if there will ever be an Xbox Series X modchip.
- pabs3 4y ago
  Agreed. That is a big part of why copyleft licenses like the GPL ensure users get the right to read, reuse, rebuild, reinstall software. https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-the-gpl-right-to-install/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t... https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/
freejazz 4y ago
That's already the case with copyright, which is distinct from patent.
- fluoridation 4y ago
  You can, in fact, copyright closed source software.
  - freejazz 4y ago
    Everything is automatically copyrighted in the US, enforcing it requires registering your copyright
- pabs3 4y ago
  Thats incorrect, copyright law has no requirements around source code.

by pabs3 4y ago

mschuster91 4y ago

Add on that No Tooling == No Copyright. Source code is one thing, but particularly for large projects or ones ... creatively abusing compiler features depending on a specific version, you're straight fucked without the build environment used. And that's not all... there is one elephant left in the room: code signing keys. Like, what is it worth when you have the source code and the build environment, but the computer running it is locked down hard by an actually capable TEE? For now, a lot of these can be bypassed by the arcane art of power glitching, but that won't be the case forever - and some console makers, like Microsoft or Sony prior to removing Linux from the PS3, took away the incentive many elite hackers had to make homebrew possible so it's a good question if there will ever be an Xbox Series X modchip.

pabs3 4y ago
Agreed. That is a big part of why copyleft licenses like the GPL ensure users get the right to read, reuse, rebuild, reinstall software. https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-the-gpl-right-to-install/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t... https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/

freejazz 4y ago

That's already the case with copyright, which is distinct from patent.

fluoridation 4y ago
You can, in fact, copyright closed source software.
- freejazz 4y ago
  Everything is automatically copyrighted in the US, enforcing it requires registering your copyright
pabs3 4y ago
Thats incorrect, copyright law has no requirements around source code.