• KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you’re free to upload work you didn’t do, with malicious changes meant to make money, that you can promote above the original, you’re freedoms should be smacked.

    • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      From when taking someone’s work, improving it and then selling became unacceptable?

      In physical world we did not expect IKEA to grow their own trees. In science world we do not expect mathematican to reinvent whole math every time doing something.

      People selling or giving away some software and expecting they still should have control over copies they sold are just doing harm. It’s 2023 and some still cannot accept the fact that digital copying exists. Get over it and make money on doing new work, not creating artifical licence to force numbers into being a scaresity.

        • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No, I consider trying to remain control over software even after selling it an unacceptable attempt, because of the consequences it makes to what it means to have a copy of some software.

          Blocking modified versions with bad things added is in my opinion is not enough reason to turn code from freely usable math into a controlled product.

          That’s because having a choice between ad version from random guy and adfree version from origin creator, noone is going to choose the mod. And if Louis want to prevent situations like with NewPipe, there is a thing just for that: trademarks.