4 ms·

How exactly would someone prove they improved/extended/modified the source? These sort of copy-left licenses rely an awful lot on good faith, and that does not

by Alupis 3y ago

How exactly would someone prove they improved/extended/modified the source? These sort of copy-left licenses rely an awful lot on good faith, and that does not contend for human nature. Even if someone could prove it - good luck legally compelling Apple to do anything.

samatman 3y ago
> How exactly would someone prove they improved/extended/modified the source? Disassembly would work. > These sort of copy-left licenses rely an awful lot on good faith, and that does not contend for human nature. This is not a copyleft license. Also, copyleft licenses rely on lawsuit, more than good faith. > Even if someone could prove it - good luck legally compelling Apple to do anything. If Apple gets sued, they do have to show up in court. If they lose, they must pay damages. If they're injuncted, and do not comply with the injunction, the courts can take any number of actions against them in response. I don't sit on Apple's board, but I can't imagine them preferring an arbitrarily-large fine over releasing GPL-licensed code which Apple modified without complying with the license.
- Alupis 3y ago
  > If Apple gets sued, they do have to show up in court This is a very naïve view of the legal process. Apple could, and would drag the process out and make it as costly/lengthy as possible. They can outlast any feasible plaintiff - especially in the FOSS world (what we're discussing here). It matters not how just or righteous your case may be. It only matters how deep your pockets are. Apple's are much deeper than FSF or any other organization that would bring a suit. It's that simple... > Disassembly would work. Doing so would violate their EULA/TOS and expose yourself to a suit as well. Fun times. > Also, copyleft licenses rely on lawsuit, more than good faith How many of those cases have actually seen a courtroom - and how many did the plaintiffs actually prevail?

by Alupis 3y ago

samatman 3y ago

> How exactly would someone prove they improved/extended/modified the source? Disassembly would work. > These sort of copy-left licenses rely an awful lot on good faith, and that does not contend for human nature. This is not a copyleft license. Also, copyleft licenses rely on lawsuit, more than good faith. > Even if someone could prove it - good luck legally compelling Apple to do anything. If Apple gets sued, they do have to show up in court. If they lose, they must pay damages. If they're injuncted, and do not comply with the injunction, the courts can take any number of actions against them in response. I don't sit on Apple's board, but I can't imagine them preferring an arbitrarily-large fine over releasing GPL-licensed code which Apple modified without complying with the license.

Alupis 3y ago
> If Apple gets sued, they do have to show up in court This is a very naïve view of the legal process. Apple could, and would drag the process out and make it as costly/lengthy as possible. They can outlast any feasible plaintiff - especially in the FOSS world (what we're discussing here). It matters not how just or righteous your case may be. It only matters how deep your pockets are. Apple's are much deeper than FSF or any other organization that would bring a suit. It's that simple... > Disassembly would work. Doing so would violate their EULA/TOS and expose yourself to a suit as well. Fun times. > Also, copyleft licenses rely on lawsuit, more than good faith How many of those cases have actually seen a courtroom - and how many did the plaintiffs actually prevail?