7 ms·

Have you ever received C&D for your work? There's a big problem of OSS projects being TOS-trolled by billion dollar companies and having to shut down out of fea

Have you ever received C&D for your work? There's a big problem of OSS projects being TOS-trolled by billion dollar companies and having to shut down out of fear.

wslh 3y ago
You know, your question is very interesting: no, we didn't. Anecdote: we reverse engineered several Microsoft products and before Microsoft Windows 7 launch we were contacted by Microsoft QA and they offered us support to check if our software was compatible with it! BTW, our software was installed in millions of computers around the globe. For example, Trend Micro used our software for supporting their antivirus in Outlook Express and Windows Mail. Our Deviare Hooking Engine [1] was eclipsed when Microsoft Detours [2] turned to an MIT license and free. Even when our was superior in several ways. This is why I wrote that you should continuously fight for "adversarial interoperability". [1] https://github.com/nektra/Deviare2 https://github.com/nektra/Deviare2 [2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/detours/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/detours/
- smashah 3y ago
  I agree. After receiving a C&D from Meta for my OSS project (along with some other maintainers from some other projects) I strongly believe adversarial interop is a basic digital right that is required to fulfil the broken or revoked promises of web 2.0 If you know anybody that can help please let me know because I want to get back to maintaining the project.
  - wslh 3y ago
    Did you contact specific organizations such as FSF, EFF, etc and/or specialized lawyers? There were well known people defending itself or being plaintiffs. For example, https://cr.yp.to/export.html https://cr.yp.to/export.html
  - rezonant 3y ago
    What is the project? On what grounds did they C&D you?
    - smashah 3y ago
      Here's a write up of the legal threats timeline to our projects and how it coincides with their in house development of an npm package: https://gist.github.com/smashah/667d4d5cf31670ee87547450861a603b https://gist.github.com/smashah/667d4d5cf31670ee87547450861a... They sent us C&Ds based on ToS. Meta has done this before to insta and android devs. Some never came back to their projects. It causes insane amount of stress and depression amongst the devs I've spoken with who went through the same thing.
sneak 3y ago
What would they demand they cease doing? Publishing software? If the use of this software is against their rights in some way, the end users running it would be the ones in violation. Publishing original software is protected expression.
- graphe 3y ago
  This was tried by apple. https://www.engadget.com/apple-drops-its-lawsuit-against-a-manufacturer-of-i-phone-emulators-082100357.html https://www.engadget.com/apple-drops-its-lawsuit-against-a-m...
  - sneak 3y ago
    Emulation software isn’t wholly original as it needs firmware and software from the device so emulated. An iPhone emulator with no bootrom and no iOS isn’t very useful. An open source client for an API need not include any non-original works.
    - graphe 3y ago
      They are though. https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=38534247 https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=38534247
      - rezonant 3y ago
        After digging in more I believe that is only done in that proof of concept. If that's the case then it's too bad they didn't go back and update the POC to avoid the need for the binary.
        sprite 3y ago
        For the app it is probably just done server side.
    - captn3m0 3y ago
      There is a very useful iPhone emulator with no bootrom and no iOS: https://touchhle.org/ https://touchhle.org/ It targets games, so manages to be useful without having to emulate or re-implement the majority of the OS.

Have you ever received C&D for your work? There's a big problem of OSS projects being TOS-trolled by billion dollar companies and having to shut down out of fear.

wslh 3y ago

You know, your question is very interesting: no, we didn't. Anecdote: we reverse engineered several Microsoft products and before Microsoft Windows 7 launch we were contacted by Microsoft QA and they offered us support to check if our software was compatible with it! BTW, our software was installed in millions of computers around the globe. For example, Trend Micro used our software for supporting their antivirus in Outlook Express and Windows Mail. Our Deviare Hooking Engine [1] was eclipsed when Microsoft Detours [2] turned to an MIT license and free. Even when our was superior in several ways. This is why I wrote that you should continuously fight for "adversarial interoperability". [1] https://github.com/nektra/Deviare2 https://github.com/nektra/Deviare2 [2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/detours/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/detours/

smashah 3y ago
I agree. After receiving a C&D from Meta for my OSS project (along with some other maintainers from some other projects) I strongly believe adversarial interop is a basic digital right that is required to fulfil the broken or revoked promises of web 2.0 If you know anybody that can help please let me know because I want to get back to maintaining the project.
- wslh 3y ago
  Did you contact specific organizations such as FSF, EFF, etc and/or specialized lawyers? There were well known people defending itself or being plaintiffs. For example, https://cr.yp.to/export.html https://cr.yp.to/export.html
- rezonant 3y ago
  What is the project? On what grounds did they C&D you?
  - smashah 3y ago
    Here's a write up of the legal threats timeline to our projects and how it coincides with their in house development of an npm package: https://gist.github.com/smashah/667d4d5cf31670ee87547450861a603b https://gist.github.com/smashah/667d4d5cf31670ee87547450861a... They sent us C&Ds based on ToS. Meta has done this before to insta and android devs. Some never came back to their projects. It causes insane amount of stress and depression amongst the devs I've spoken with who went through the same thing.

sneak 3y ago

What would they demand they cease doing? Publishing software? If the use of this software is against their rights in some way, the end users running it would be the ones in violation. Publishing original software is protected expression.

graphe 3y ago
This was tried by apple. https://www.engadget.com/apple-drops-its-lawsuit-against-a-manufacturer-of-i-phone-emulators-082100357.html https://www.engadget.com/apple-drops-its-lawsuit-against-a-m...
- sneak 3y ago
  Emulation software isn’t wholly original as it needs firmware and software from the device so emulated. An iPhone emulator with no bootrom and no iOS isn’t very useful. An open source client for an API need not include any non-original works.
  - graphe 3y ago
    They are though. https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=38534247 https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=38534247
    - rezonant 3y ago
      After digging in more I believe that is only done in that proof of concept. If that's the case then it's too bad they didn't go back and update the POC to avoid the need for the binary.
      - sprite 3y ago
        For the app it is probably just done server side.
  - captn3m0 3y ago
    There is a very useful iPhone emulator with no bootrom and no iOS: https://touchhle.org/ https://touchhle.org/ It targets games, so manages to be useful without having to emulate or re-implement the majority of the OS.