5 ms·

Impersonation would be a dick move, and would ruin my reputation. Do not need laws to avoid such things. Obvious social repercussions are enough. Still imperso

by lrvick 2y ago

Impersonation would be a dick move, and would ruin my reputation. Do not need laws to avoid such things. Obvious social repercussions are enough. Still impersonation sucks, and it happens. Thankfully we can solve this with cryptography without trying to beg the legal system of hundreds of countries to agree on enforcement tactics. I publish 100% of code I write as FOSS. I also sign my commits. If the code shows up later without attribution to me, I would prove it publicly to call out dishonest behavior. I would also never use legal action for this though. All information should be free. I only put FOSS licenses on code to ensure I do not get sued and so corporations bound by such silly rules have a difficult time using my work in private codebases without paying me for an alternate license. I would abolish all IP law if I could. Let all information be free without legal risk to authors or those that share it.

palata 2y ago
> I publish 100% of code I write as FOSS. This is not public domain. > and so corporations bound by such silly rules have a difficult time using my work in private codebases without paying me for an alternate license. So... you benefit from copyright laws. > to ensure I do not get sued Why would you get sued by releasing your code as public domain?
- roguecoder 2y ago
  Liability laws often don't care if something is free.
  - palata 2y ago
    Which is beside the point. The person I am answering to says that they don't believe in copyright laws, but still they use licenses like MIT. Why not using CC0 then?
    - lrvick 2y ago
      "CC0 has not been approved by the Open Source Initiative and does not license or otherwise affect any patent rights you may have. You may want to consider using an approved OSI license that does so instead of CC0, such as GPL 3.0 or Apache 2.0." https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ CC0 is great but it does not go far enough for software. Patent and trademark rights are complex and it caused CC0 to be withdrawn from OSI consideration. https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2012-February/001565.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... I do not know why it has to be so legally complicated to say TAKE MY WORK IT IS FREE FOR ALL. IMO ISC is the current best OSI approved option for ensuring technical work can be used as broadly as possible and is what I use for recent work. https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/isc-license https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/isc-license Show me something OSI compatible less restrictive than ISC and I will use that.
      - palata 2y ago
        > Show me something OSI compatible less restrictive than ISC and I will use that. I'm more of a copyleft person, so I can't help there. But I can say that copyleft requires copyright laws.
- lrvick 2y ago
  > This is not public domain. MIT, ISC licenses etc offer minimum anti-liabiliy CYA here and are what I typically use. They are a hack to get around the fact you cannot actually public domain code without legal risk. > So... you benefit from copyright laws. I sometimes exploit laws that I feel should not exist at all specifically to target corporations who abuse them the most. In my preferred world where copyright and patents did not exist, I would not need to play such games.
  - palata 2y ago
    Right. So you use copyright laws because you need them. I wish we did not need money, but I don't go around telling people that they should stop using money because in my preferred world, money would not exist and we would all live happily.
    - lrvick 2y ago
      I do not need copyright law. Just anti-liability licenses so i do not get sued. My interest is protecting myself, not the work. I believe all knowledge should be freely available and live by that. While I do not believe in IP law but I am happy to take money from those that do. I sell my time so long as the buyer allows my work to be freely licensed for all. They can do with their own copy whatever they want and not credit me though. That is fine.
      - palata 2y ago
        It honestly feels like your view on the topic is entirely defined around yourself. Like if a billionaire could genuinely not understand why people need medical insurance, because "you can just pay cash, like I do". You are in a special situation where customers pay for your time. Of course it's easy to say "as long as I am paid for my time, I want my work to be public". But say you create a video game. You invest two years working on it, and at the end you sell it for 50$. The first customer buys it, and publishes online for everybody to download legally for free. Does that sound okay for you? Because you don't need copyright laws doesn't mean that nobody does. And again, you admitted yourself that you do need them and you do use them. You just wish you didn't. And I can agree with you on that. I wish there was no war, and no poverty, too. I am not saying that everything about IP laws or copyright is perfect. Just that it's more complicated than "it's just a ball of worms, throw it away". Some people abuse copyright, some people need it. Whoever is fine screwing those who do because it doesn't affect them are jerks.

by lrvick 2y ago

palata 2y ago

> I publish 100% of code I write as FOSS. This is not public domain. > and so corporations bound by such silly rules have a difficult time using my work in private codebases without paying me for an alternate license. So... you benefit from copyright laws. > to ensure I do not get sued Why would you get sued by releasing your code as public domain?

roguecoder 2y ago
Liability laws often don't care if something is free.
- palata 2y ago
  Which is beside the point. The person I am answering to says that they don't believe in copyright laws, but still they use licenses like MIT. Why not using CC0 then?
  - lrvick 2y ago
    "CC0 has not been approved by the Open Source Initiative and does not license or otherwise affect any patent rights you may have. You may want to consider using an approved OSI license that does so instead of CC0, such as GPL 3.0 or Apache 2.0." https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ CC0 is great but it does not go far enough for software. Patent and trademark rights are complex and it caused CC0 to be withdrawn from OSI consideration. https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2012-February/001565.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... I do not know why it has to be so legally complicated to say TAKE MY WORK IT IS FREE FOR ALL. IMO ISC is the current best OSI approved option for ensuring technical work can be used as broadly as possible and is what I use for recent work. https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/isc-license https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/isc-license Show me something OSI compatible less restrictive than ISC and I will use that.
    - palata 2y ago
      > Show me something OSI compatible less restrictive than ISC and I will use that. I'm more of a copyleft person, so I can't help there. But I can say that copyleft requires copyright laws.
lrvick 2y ago
> This is not public domain. MIT, ISC licenses etc offer minimum anti-liabiliy CYA here and are what I typically use. They are a hack to get around the fact you cannot actually public domain code without legal risk. > So... you benefit from copyright laws. I sometimes exploit laws that I feel should not exist at all specifically to target corporations who abuse them the most. In my preferred world where copyright and patents did not exist, I would not need to play such games.
- palata 2y ago
  Right. So you use copyright laws because you need them. I wish we did not need money, but I don't go around telling people that they should stop using money because in my preferred world, money would not exist and we would all live happily.
  - lrvick 2y ago
    I do not need copyright law. Just anti-liability licenses so i do not get sued. My interest is protecting myself, not the work. I believe all knowledge should be freely available and live by that. While I do not believe in IP law but I am happy to take money from those that do. I sell my time so long as the buyer allows my work to be freely licensed for all. They can do with their own copy whatever they want and not credit me though. That is fine.
    - palata 2y ago
      It honestly feels like your view on the topic is entirely defined around yourself. Like if a billionaire could genuinely not understand why people need medical insurance, because "you can just pay cash, like I do". You are in a special situation where customers pay for your time. Of course it's easy to say "as long as I am paid for my time, I want my work to be public". But say you create a video game. You invest two years working on it, and at the end you sell it for 50$. The first customer buys it, and publishes online for everybody to download legally for free. Does that sound okay for you? Because you don't need copyright laws doesn't mean that nobody does. And again, you admitted yourself that you do need them and you do use them. You just wish you didn't. And I can agree with you on that. I wish there was no war, and no poverty, too. I am not saying that everything about IP laws or copyright is perfect. Just that it's more complicated than "it's just a ball of worms, throw it away". Some people abuse copyright, some people need it. Whoever is fine screwing those who do because it doesn't affect them are jerks.