4 ms·

Open source is decentralized. Everyone is the maintainer. If there is a bug in the code, then anyone can fork and fix it. I don't understand how this law can ap

by hgs3 3y ago

Open source is decentralized. Everyone is the maintainer. If there is a bug in the code, then anyone can fork and fix it. I don't understand how this law can apply to OSS period.

sidewndr46 3y ago
It's simple. The police get a warrant, pursuant to local laws. They show up and arrest someone. That person is put on trial. What happens next, I don't know. Legal systems do not have to be coherent or logical, only actionable.
- hgs3 3y ago
  > It's simple. The police get a warrant, pursuant to local laws. They show up and arrest someone. OSS is decentralized. Everyone has source access. The police will have to arrest everyone, including themselves.
  - sidewndr46 3y ago
    You seem to be acting deliberately ignorant. The police could in fact do that. But in reality a judge will write a warrant for either one individual or just a small group of individuals that a public prosecutor (I do not know the term in the EU) presents to the judge. The police will arrest only those people. "arrest everyone" is some bizarre fantasy that the legal system is both ineffective and stupid.
    - hgs3 3y ago
      > You seem to be acting deliberately ignorant. That's not a charitable interpretation. Try re-reading what I've written from the perspective of someone pointing out logical flaws of a proposed law.
      - webstrand 3y ago
        > I don't understand how this law can apply to OSS period. That's what the commenter is responding to. Laws are clearly not applied logically, and while you may be able to make that argument in court, it's never clear that it will be accepted.
        hgs3 3y ago
        > Laws are clearly not applied logically, and while you may be able to make that argument in court, it's never clear that it will be accepted. I don't disagree, but I'm not making a defense argument in a courtroom, I'm making a logical argument about a proposed law on a message board. I agree laws are not applied logically which is why they must be scrutinized logically before they become laws.
        geysersam 3y ago
        > laws are not applied logically The logical conclusion of that is that we shouldn't have any laws... Except it's not true. Of course laws are not applied strictly accordingly to the laws of logic, nothing is, but there is a relatively high degree of logic and predictability in the legal system. That doesn't stop absurd rulings in some occasions. But from that concluding that "laws are not logical" is an overreaction.
  - kumi111 3y ago
    ahah yeah, it's decentralized, everyone can, not obligated but can contribute. either they sue everyone (as i think it's more of economic damage) or people contribute anonymously.
  - __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
    But in practice, they'll only arrest the people they dislike.
__MatrixMan__ 3y ago
Alexey Pertsev might have an interesting perspective on that.
jeroenhd 3y ago
It applies if the maintainers if the project sell support. For example, Red Hat sells support for their open source licenses so Red Hat will have to follow the law. Things may be less clear when it comes to donations, where customers don't directly purchase a service yet the developer makes a bit of money, but from the context of the proposed text I don't think that is what the law intends to cover.
- hgs3 3y ago
  > It applies if the maintainers if the project sell support. Support is a gray area. Not only are there different kinds of support that have nothing to do with code, like selling training material, but there is also selling ones expertise of a codebase as a consultant without necessarily making code changes oneself. Presumably one could author a support contract to state that the code is a fork, regardless of whether there are changes or not, and that the price paid is merely a consulting fee. If you accept the premise that OSS is decentralized, then so is the right to repair. Anyone can learn the code and charge a one-off service fee for fixing a defect. I'm not sure how liable one could be here. If you sell an annual support contact then presumably you're only on the hook for the year and not the "lifetime of the product" which is vague given the decentralized nature of OSS.

by hgs3 3y ago

Open source is decentralized. Everyone is the maintainer. If there is a bug in the code, then anyone can fork and fix it. I don't understand how this law can apply to OSS period.

sidewndr46 3y ago

It's simple. The police get a warrant, pursuant to local laws. They show up and arrest someone. That person is put on trial. What happens next, I don't know. Legal systems do not have to be coherent or logical, only actionable.

hgs3 3y ago
> It's simple. The police get a warrant, pursuant to local laws. They show up and arrest someone. OSS is decentralized. Everyone has source access. The police will have to arrest everyone, including themselves.
- sidewndr46 3y ago
  You seem to be acting deliberately ignorant. The police could in fact do that. But in reality a judge will write a warrant for either one individual or just a small group of individuals that a public prosecutor (I do not know the term in the EU) presents to the judge. The police will arrest only those people. "arrest everyone" is some bizarre fantasy that the legal system is both ineffective and stupid.
  - hgs3 3y ago
    > You seem to be acting deliberately ignorant. That's not a charitable interpretation. Try re-reading what I've written from the perspective of someone pointing out logical flaws of a proposed law.
    - webstrand 3y ago
      > I don't understand how this law can apply to OSS period. That's what the commenter is responding to. Laws are clearly not applied logically, and while you may be able to make that argument in court, it's never clear that it will be accepted.
      - hgs3 3y ago
        > Laws are clearly not applied logically, and while you may be able to make that argument in court, it's never clear that it will be accepted. I don't disagree, but I'm not making a defense argument in a courtroom, I'm making a logical argument about a proposed law on a message board. I agree laws are not applied logically which is why they must be scrutinized logically before they become laws.
      - geysersam 3y ago
        > laws are not applied logically The logical conclusion of that is that we shouldn't have any laws... Except it's not true. Of course laws are not applied strictly accordingly to the laws of logic, nothing is, but there is a relatively high degree of logic and predictability in the legal system. That doesn't stop absurd rulings in some occasions. But from that concluding that "laws are not logical" is an overreaction.
- kumi111 3y ago
  ahah yeah, it's decentralized, everyone can, not obligated but can contribute. either they sue everyone (as i think it's more of economic damage) or people contribute anonymously.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
  But in practice, they'll only arrest the people they dislike.

__MatrixMan__ 3y ago

Alexey Pertsev might have an interesting perspective on that.

jeroenhd 3y ago

It applies if the maintainers if the project sell support. For example, Red Hat sells support for their open source licenses so Red Hat will have to follow the law. Things may be less clear when it comes to donations, where customers don't directly purchase a service yet the developer makes a bit of money, but from the context of the proposed text I don't think that is what the law intends to cover.

hgs3 3y ago
> It applies if the maintainers if the project sell support. Support is a gray area. Not only are there different kinds of support that have nothing to do with code, like selling training material, but there is also selling ones expertise of a codebase as a consultant without necessarily making code changes oneself. Presumably one could author a support contract to state that the code is a fork, regardless of whether there are changes or not, and that the price paid is merely a consulting fee. If you accept the premise that OSS is decentralized, then so is the right to repair. Anyone can learn the code and charge a one-off service fee for fixing a defect. I'm not sure how liable one could be here. If you sell an annual support contact then presumably you're only on the hook for the year and not the "lifetime of the product" which is vague given the decentralized nature of OSS.