41 ms·
I don't fully understand the situation. This statement [1] seems to indicate that Nova doesn't have to open-source it: > Cliff: Branch owns Nova completely and
by selcuka 1y ago
I don't fully understand the situation. This statement [1] seems to indicate that Nova doesn't have to open-source it:
> Cliff: Branch owns Nova completely and Kevin has no access to it in any way at all. So no, he can't re-brand, keep coding and go forward. That's a breach of contract on his behalf.
...but this post says they are obligated to:
> Cliff: Much more to it than word of mouth. There's a contract as well.
[1] https://infosec.exchange/@cliffwade/115168015274422682 https://infosec.exchange/@cliffwade/115168015274422682
- croes 1y agoBranch being obliged to open source it, doesn’t mean Kevin could simply took matters into his own hands Two breaches of contract don‘t make a right
- selcuka 1y agoI'm not saying he should. Just trying to understand the issue. Apparently there are two conflicting contracts (or two sections within one contract), and Branch is counting on the fact that Branch can go after Kevin but Kevin can't/won't. Or maybe the contract is clear, but Kevin just doesn't want to burn the ships.
- croes 1y agoThey aren’t conflicting. Branch is obliged to open source the Launcher. That’s it. An employee of a company just isn’t allowed to do it on his own. If a company refuses to pay a bill that it should pay, then one of its accountants cannot simply transfer money.
- selcuka 1y agoThat makes sense, thanks.