pmm98

7 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by pmm98 5y ago

   To help me out? I’m patiently trying to explain to you that your mental model of copyright and particularly how it interacts with software is fundamentally flawed. I’m handwaving a lot of complexity when I refer to patents (and why clean ro
2. 2.▲
   by pmm98 5y ago

   Wikipedia is speaking to a broader application of copyright than software. It’s also targeting an international audience, where this varies. Again, you’re coming off uninformed here and relying on Wikipedia (which doesn’t speak to that cont
3. 3.▲
   by pmm98 5y ago

   Clean room design of software has absolutely nothing to do with copyright because software concepts cannot be copyrighted. I would encourage you to study these legal concepts further before you debate them, because you’re coming off quite u
4. 4.▲
   by pmm98 5y ago

   That you think “copyright purity” is the issue to litigate points out that you’re not very clueful either, I’m afraid. If I quit Google and write a clone search engine using none of their code but all of their technical architecture, in no
5. 5.▲
   by pmm98 5y ago

   Of course it is. The apology is intended for damage control to repl.it and his personal reputation, given he has had an hour to digest the winds of HN on both and is clearly concerned by what he sees. Dollars to donuts he remains baffled wh