4 ms·

If open source parasites like tip4commit don't learn, the next logical step is to trademark projects and send DMCA notices without wasting any further time. Al

by sfk 12y ago

If open source parasites like tip4commit don't learn, the next logical step is to trademark projects and send DMCA notices without wasting any further time. Also, with this kind of sleazy behavior, the advertising clause in the BSD license suddenly becomes very appealing again.

matrix 12y ago
Agreed. This behavior is not benign "naughtiness" (as the YC guys like to encourage), it's parasitic exploitation of other people's hard work. Another group I'd lump in with this group is readthedocs.org
- freakboy3742 12y ago
  Why you put Read The Docs in the same category? RTD doesn't host anything unless you specifically set up an account and say you want to use them. They don't troll the web looking for projects, and hosting their docs whether they want them to or not.
- legutierr 12y ago
  readthedocs.org? How so?
  - matrix 12y ago
    I put readthedocs in the same category because they try to look like the original source of the documentation. They lift the content and style, lock stock and barrel, and then try to rank higher than the actual project's documentation pages. I have in the past, unwittingly read out-of-date documentation because it looked exactly like the source site, and I didn't pay close attention to the URL. If they were truly ethical, they would not try to impersonate the original sites. It fails one of the most basic tests for trademark infringement (which is, essentially: "might someone in a hurry mistake it for the real thing?").
    - woof 12y ago
      Keep on trollin'
    - freakboy3742 12y ago
      Erm... RTD does none of those things. There's a default site theme that is specific to RTD - they don't try to impersonate anyone. They don't "lift" anything unless the project owner has opened an account and requested that their documentation be hosted on RTD. I'm at a complete loss how you've even come to the impression that RTD does the things you claim it does - because it does nothing of the sort.
- sfilipov 12y ago
  Would you please elaborate on the problem with readthedocs.org?
chakalakasp 12y ago
I don't think DMCA applies to Trademarks, it is a law that specifically pertains to copyright. The two areas of law are quite different.
- scotty79 12y ago
  Yeah. I noticed people treat DMCA as "don't do anything I don't like with what I'm involved with" law.
Bill_Dimm 12y ago
I thought DMCA applied to copyright (hence the "C" in the name), not trademark. Am I wrong?
- cookiecaper 12y ago
  No, you're right. DMCA and trademarks are completely unrelated.
tokenizerrr 12y ago
The author of tip4commit has already stated they're not from America. DMCA is only relevant within America as far as I know.
- sfk 12y ago
  Their ISP appears to be LINODE-US. But the other commenters are right that DMCA probably does not apply to trademarks.
  - godzilla82 12y ago
    Also their domain name is registered via a company registered in US.
Cakez0r 12y ago
Giving money to open source developers. How parasitical.
- dlisboa 12y ago
  Not all open source developers want money for their open source software. You think collecting money using someone else's hard work isn't a bad thing. A hard work that the person explicitly went to the trouble of making free and abstained from any income derived solely from it.
  - Cakez0r 12y ago
    I agree that an open source developer can object to donations on a personal level and I think it's a very reasonable request to personally unsubscribe from communications from some entity. What I don't agree with is complaining that you're being spammed after you put your contact information in the public domain and receive a notification that somebody would like to give you money. I also don't agree that a "project owner" should get to deny any potential contributors to receive donations based on his own personal objections.
    - dlisboa 12y ago
      I literally disagree with everything you said. First I don't agree a request should be made to unsubscribe. There shouldn't have been anything to unsubscribe from. Second it's not the project owner's fault simply because their contact information is out and about. You're saying spamming people with promises of money that has their legal name attached to is just fine and it's the people's fault they allowed themselves to get spammed. The worst thing, even, is that the people doing the donating have no idea if their money actually got to the person they intended it to. > I also don't agree that a "project owner" should get to deny any potential contributors to receive donations based on his own personal objections. This is the part I most strongly disagree with. You're trampling over people's livelihoods, principles and personal choices. Accepting donations has legal repercussions. Legal repercussions the top4commit owners wilfully disregard and have no intention of paying attention to. There are countries with laws that'd make the open source developer liable to damages and tax evasion. That is only the legal part. The principle part is that many people don't write open source software to get paid from it. They have abdicated from gaining monetary advantage from distribution of knowledge. If you want to pay them, hire them and pay them for their expertise. It's a personal choice, one that is being disrespected here. This project should simply work on consent-only or be dismantled. Remove all current repositories and advertise to gain project owners who actually want to be there. The people who created tip4commit have no legal expertise or intent to get legal advice, they're not helping the Open Source community, and most of all they have no transparency or accountability in the event of fraud.

by sfk 12y ago

matrix 12y ago

Agreed. This behavior is not benign "naughtiness" (as the YC guys like to encourage), it's parasitic exploitation of other people's hard work. Another group I'd lump in with this group is readthedocs.org

freakboy3742 12y ago
Why you put Read The Docs in the same category? RTD doesn't host anything unless you specifically set up an account and say you want to use them. They don't troll the web looking for projects, and hosting their docs whether they want them to or not.
legutierr 12y ago
readthedocs.org? How so?
- matrix 12y ago
  I put readthedocs in the same category because they try to look like the original source of the documentation. They lift the content and style, lock stock and barrel, and then try to rank higher than the actual project's documentation pages. I have in the past, unwittingly read out-of-date documentation because it looked exactly like the source site, and I didn't pay close attention to the URL. If they were truly ethical, they would not try to impersonate the original sites. It fails one of the most basic tests for trademark infringement (which is, essentially: "might someone in a hurry mistake it for the real thing?").
  - woof 12y ago
    Keep on trollin'
  - freakboy3742 12y ago
    Erm... RTD does none of those things. There's a default site theme that is specific to RTD - they don't try to impersonate anyone. They don't "lift" anything unless the project owner has opened an account and requested that their documentation be hosted on RTD. I'm at a complete loss how you've even come to the impression that RTD does the things you claim it does - because it does nothing of the sort.
sfilipov 12y ago
Would you please elaborate on the problem with readthedocs.org?

chakalakasp 12y ago

I don't think DMCA applies to Trademarks, it is a law that specifically pertains to copyright. The two areas of law are quite different.

scotty79 12y ago
Yeah. I noticed people treat DMCA as "don't do anything I don't like with what I'm involved with" law.

Bill_Dimm 12y ago

I thought DMCA applied to copyright (hence the "C" in the name), not trademark. Am I wrong?

cookiecaper 12y ago
No, you're right. DMCA and trademarks are completely unrelated.

tokenizerrr 12y ago

The author of tip4commit has already stated they're not from America. DMCA is only relevant within America as far as I know.

sfk 12y ago
Their ISP appears to be LINODE-US. But the other commenters are right that DMCA probably does not apply to trademarks.
- godzilla82 12y ago
  Also their domain name is registered via a company registered in US.

Cakez0r 12y ago

Giving money to open source developers. How parasitical.

dlisboa 12y ago
Not all open source developers want money for their open source software. You think collecting money using someone else's hard work isn't a bad thing. A hard work that the person explicitly went to the trouble of making free and abstained from any income derived solely from it.
- Cakez0r 12y ago
  I agree that an open source developer can object to donations on a personal level and I think it's a very reasonable request to personally unsubscribe from communications from some entity. What I don't agree with is complaining that you're being spammed after you put your contact information in the public domain and receive a notification that somebody would like to give you money. I also don't agree that a "project owner" should get to deny any potential contributors to receive donations based on his own personal objections.
  - dlisboa 12y ago
    I literally disagree with everything you said. First I don't agree a request should be made to unsubscribe. There shouldn't have been anything to unsubscribe from. Second it's not the project owner's fault simply because their contact information is out and about. You're saying spamming people with promises of money that has their legal name attached to is just fine and it's the people's fault they allowed themselves to get spammed. The worst thing, even, is that the people doing the donating have no idea if their money actually got to the person they intended it to. > I also don't agree that a "project owner" should get to deny any potential contributors to receive donations based on his own personal objections. This is the part I most strongly disagree with. You're trampling over people's livelihoods, principles and personal choices. Accepting donations has legal repercussions. Legal repercussions the top4commit owners wilfully disregard and have no intention of paying attention to. There are countries with laws that'd make the open source developer liable to damages and tax evasion. That is only the legal part. The principle part is that many people don't write open source software to get paid from it. They have abdicated from gaining monetary advantage from distribution of knowledge. If you want to pay them, hire them and pay them for their expertise. It's a personal choice, one that is being disrespected here. This project should simply work on consent-only or be dismantled. Remove all current repositories and advertise to gain project owners who actually want to be there. The people who created tip4commit have no legal expertise or intent to get legal advice, they're not helping the Open Source community, and most of all they have no transparency or accountability in the event of fraud.