6 ms·

The software heritage sent me an email they were going to steal copies of my software. I think they assumed because it was published as a git repo they had unli

The software heritage sent me an email they were going to steal copies of my software. I think they assumed because it was published as a git repo they had unlimited rights to steal, reproduce, sell, etc my copyrighted work. To quote the email they sent me: "The mission of Software Heritage is to collect, preserve and share all the publicly available source code: https://www.softwareheritage.org https://www.softwareheritage.org" So they're telling me their intent is to reproduce (share) my work, just because it was publicly available. Upon my reply they did offer to cancel the request, but also told me they are facilitating the storage of my code for users private theft " "Add forge now" requests are submitted by Software Heritage users who think that a forge is worth being archived. After a careful examination of your arguments, we acknowledge that your forges may not be archived, so we won't process their ingestion, and close this add forge now request. However, we cannot prevent a publicly available from being archived by anyone using our "Save code now" feature

remotefonts 3y ago
Steal your repos? So you don't have them anymore because they took them? Maybe ask nicely to have them back and with a bit of luck they'll give them back to you.
- calvinmorrison 3y ago
  reproducing my work without license is theft.
  - rpdillon 3y ago
    I mean, this is a matter of law, and it isn't. It's a curious point to double down on.
- bevekspldnw 3y ago
  Curiously, the people most vociferous about digital copying of IP not being “theft” tend to be those people who have produced the least amount of original IP. Surprisingly, the people generating real, novel, IP like to buy groceries now and then.
  - mik1998 3y ago
    Absurd, presumably anecdotal claim. My own anecdotal experience is that it has no relation and I know many people who have violated the copyright on the IP they themselves produced.
    - calvinmorrison 3y ago
      how does one violate their own copyright? I mean, its my IP, I am free to license, distribute, and so forth as I see fit, there's an implicit "All Rights Reserved".
      - mik1998 3y ago
        People who produce IP either by work for hire or by selling their copyright rights. I've had people "steal" IP by sending me a PDF of a paper they wrote whose copyright resides with their university. Not the typical image of a thief.
- rpdillon 3y ago
  This is a sound point, even if it's being made a bit sarcastically. Copyright and intellectual property are an entirely different body of law than property rights, and people most often conflate them as an emotionally charged rhetorical technique that's generally rooted in a dissatisfaction that intellectual property and physical property are treated differently. The use of the word "steal" in this context is probably to incite readers to their cause, but ends up just sounding sophomoric to people that know anything about intellectual property law. It's a shame because the GP had some valuable information to share about the emails software heritage was sending, but likely got downvoted because of this.
  - calvinmorrison 3y ago
    Problem is GP (me) is a dickhead about it. but frankly, it's not the first time. Github (after purchase by microsoft) did the same thing to my code. They reproduced it and put it on ice in some place in norway. That was the guise right? I mean I am sure they did, but you can bet your ass they're also using my code to train their AI. Most of it was not licensed. It was publicly available as a portfolio so people would see I write serious code and would hire me. So then I took down my entire github after being informed I was enrolled, couldn't opt out, etc, and then some OTHER foundation is now scanning my self hosted git repos? That made my blood BOIL!
buffington 3y ago
Do you happen to still have that email? I'd like to search my inbox for anything similar, and would love some snippets to search for. Edit: I asked this before the parent commenter included the contents of the email. Thanks parent commenter!
- calvinmorrison 3y ago
  Hello Calvin Morrison, The mission of Software Heritage is to collect, preserve and share all the publicly available source code: https://www.softwareheritage.org https://www.softwareheritage.org We have received a request to add the forge hosted at the URL below to the list of software origins that are archived, and it is our understanding that you are or know the contact person for this forge. https://git.ceux.org/ https://git.ceux.org/ In order to archive the forge contents, we will have to periodically pull the public repositories it contains and clone them into the Software Heritage archive. FAQs for our processes are available: https://docs.softwareheritage.org/user/faq/#add-forge-now https://docs.softwareheritage.org/user/faq/#add-forge-now https://www.softwareheritage.org/faq/ https://www.softwareheritage.org/faq/ Please let us know if there are any issues to consider before we launch the archival of the public repositories hosted on your infrastructure. Please use "Reply all" to ensure our system will process your answer properly. In the absence of an answer to this message, we will start to archive your forge in the coming weeks. Only the publicly accessible repositories will be archived. Thank you in advance for your help. Kind regards, The Software Heritage team -- bye, pabs
AshamedCaptain 3y ago
Have you figured out if there is a way to prevent them from doing that? The email I got, which I assume is similar, was suspiciously lacking a "just GTFO and leave my website alone" option.
- dustyharddrive 3y ago
  At least some of their software has unique user agents ("Software Heritage*"). I wish a popular FOSS host like Codeberg would block them.
- calvinmorrison 3y ago
  They explicitly told me they could not blacklist me, but they did do a prompt takedown.
- gavinhoward 3y ago
  I blocked their IP address specifically. Contact me if you want it.
ryan-c 3y ago
> However, we cannot prevent a publicly available from being archived by anyone using our "Save code now" feature This is not true. They just had to remove about 500 public repos to comply with my copyright.
- calvinmorrison 3y ago
  It's true as in, that's what they told me when I asked.
  - ryan-c 3y ago
    They're lying.

remotefonts 3y ago

Steal your repos? So you don't have them anymore because they took them? Maybe ask nicely to have them back and with a bit of luck they'll give them back to you.

calvinmorrison 3y ago
reproducing my work without license is theft.
- rpdillon 3y ago
  I mean, this is a matter of law, and it isn't. It's a curious point to double down on.
bevekspldnw 3y ago
Curiously, the people most vociferous about digital copying of IP not being “theft” tend to be those people who have produced the least amount of original IP. Surprisingly, the people generating real, novel, IP like to buy groceries now and then.
- mik1998 3y ago
  Absurd, presumably anecdotal claim. My own anecdotal experience is that it has no relation and I know many people who have violated the copyright on the IP they themselves produced.
  - calvinmorrison 3y ago
    how does one violate their own copyright? I mean, its my IP, I am free to license, distribute, and so forth as I see fit, there's an implicit "All Rights Reserved".
    - mik1998 3y ago
      People who produce IP either by work for hire or by selling their copyright rights. I've had people "steal" IP by sending me a PDF of a paper they wrote whose copyright resides with their university. Not the typical image of a thief.
rpdillon 3y ago
This is a sound point, even if it's being made a bit sarcastically. Copyright and intellectual property are an entirely different body of law than property rights, and people most often conflate them as an emotionally charged rhetorical technique that's generally rooted in a dissatisfaction that intellectual property and physical property are treated differently. The use of the word "steal" in this context is probably to incite readers to their cause, but ends up just sounding sophomoric to people that know anything about intellectual property law. It's a shame because the GP had some valuable information to share about the emails software heritage was sending, but likely got downvoted because of this.
- calvinmorrison 3y ago
  Problem is GP (me) is a dickhead about it. but frankly, it's not the first time. Github (after purchase by microsoft) did the same thing to my code. They reproduced it and put it on ice in some place in norway. That was the guise right? I mean I am sure they did, but you can bet your ass they're also using my code to train their AI. Most of it was not licensed. It was publicly available as a portfolio so people would see I write serious code and would hire me. So then I took down my entire github after being informed I was enrolled, couldn't opt out, etc, and then some OTHER foundation is now scanning my self hosted git repos? That made my blood BOIL!

buffington 3y ago

Do you happen to still have that email? I'd like to search my inbox for anything similar, and would love some snippets to search for. Edit: I asked this before the parent commenter included the contents of the email. Thanks parent commenter!

calvinmorrison 3y ago
Hello Calvin Morrison, The mission of Software Heritage is to collect, preserve and share all the publicly available source code: https://www.softwareheritage.org https://www.softwareheritage.org We have received a request to add the forge hosted at the URL below to the list of software origins that are archived, and it is our understanding that you are or know the contact person for this forge. https://git.ceux.org/ https://git.ceux.org/ In order to archive the forge contents, we will have to periodically pull the public repositories it contains and clone them into the Software Heritage archive. FAQs for our processes are available: https://docs.softwareheritage.org/user/faq/#add-forge-now https://docs.softwareheritage.org/user/faq/#add-forge-now https://www.softwareheritage.org/faq/ https://www.softwareheritage.org/faq/ Please let us know if there are any issues to consider before we launch the archival of the public repositories hosted on your infrastructure. Please use "Reply all" to ensure our system will process your answer properly. In the absence of an answer to this message, we will start to archive your forge in the coming weeks. Only the publicly accessible repositories will be archived. Thank you in advance for your help. Kind regards, The Software Heritage team -- bye, pabs

AshamedCaptain 3y ago

Have you figured out if there is a way to prevent them from doing that? The email I got, which I assume is similar, was suspiciously lacking a "just GTFO and leave my website alone" option.

dustyharddrive 3y ago
At least some of their software has unique user agents ("Software Heritage*"). I wish a popular FOSS host like Codeberg would block them.
calvinmorrison 3y ago
They explicitly told me they could not blacklist me, but they did do a prompt takedown.
gavinhoward 3y ago
I blocked their IP address specifically. Contact me if you want it.

ryan-c 3y ago

> However, we cannot prevent a publicly available from being archived by anyone using our "Save code now" feature This is not true. They just had to remove about 500 public repos to comply with my copyright.

calvinmorrison 3y ago
It's true as in, that's what they told me when I asked.
- ryan-c 3y ago
  They're lying.