3 ms·

Openwashing: https://web.archive.org/web/20241008220257/https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/blob/community/LICENSE.md#5-restrictions https://web.archive.org

• ezekg 2y ago
  Did the authors claim to be open source somewhere I must have missed? Without that, I don't see how this is open-washing...
  • fluoridation 2y ago
    Yes, actually. >The Winamp Collaborative License is a free, copyleft license for software and other kinds of works.
    • ezekg 2y ago
      Hmm, I must have missed that. I stand corrected, then. Perhaps the author thinks copyleft can be divorced from open source? They didn't claim to be open source here, but they do claim to be (very strong?) copyleft -- almost like a single-source copyleft kind of interpretation. But yeah, I get it now. ty
      • fluoridation 2y ago
        As others have pointed out, it's very likely the "author" was an LLM. It's clear no lawyer ever gave this a once-over. I can easily imagine a manager telling ChatGPT "write a copyleft license that doesn't allow other people making modified versions of my software".