←back to thread

431 points dangle1 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.242s | source
Show context
VonGuard ◴[] No.41861368[source]
This is a cautionary tale for preservationists. My current preservation project is still not open because we are very slowly reviewing the code to make sure we don't accidentally include any IP when we open the source code. The real things that get you are similar to what happened here: codecs, graphics libraries, and a really big one to look out for is fonts. It'd be great if there was a scanner that could detect this stuff, but unfortunately, the scanning tools out there tend to go the other way like Black Duck: they detect open source code, not closed source.
replies(4): >>41861469 #>>41861524 #>>41861575 #>>41861816 #
sph ◴[] No.41861575[source]
Unpopular opinion: preservationism shouldn't care about licensing and legal nonsense.

Because what is the point if something is distributed in a restrictive license, can't be preserved and then gets lost to time? Also, licensing is to avoid distribution, modification or outright copying by competitors; preservation is completely orthogonal to those concerns. It is to avoid losing a piece of craft to the sands of time. There is no reason laws should have power over anything in perpetuity.

As seen in other spaces, pirates ignoring the "law" will provide the greatest service to humanity.

replies(5): >>41861695 #>>41861794 #>>41862313 #>>41862832 #>>41865459 #
colechristensen ◴[] No.41861695[source]
>preservationism shouldn't care about licensing and legal nonsense.

If it is reasonable that someone needs to preserve something because it has been abandoned, then the thing should automatically be in the public domain.

If you are not actively using IP for a reasonable amount of time, any patents, trademarks, copyrights, etc should be permanently expired.

This fixes problems with patent trolls too: you effectively would not be able to own a patent unless you were using it in your business.

replies(3): >>41861718 #>>41862116 #>>41902564 #
VonGuard ◴[] No.41861718[source]
Great idea except it won't make anyone money. Therefore it will never happen. Copyright law in America is not based on good ideas, reasonability, or even preservation. They are based on profit. Your idea is great, but we do not live in a world where good ideas matter at all. Only money matters here, and this idea will not make anyone money.
replies(1): >>41862780 #
jart ◴[] No.41862780[source]
It's not a great idea, because law and policy are designed to privilege makers rather than takers. It's a subversive degenerate kind of morality to argue that things belong to the people who desire to consume them.
replies(2): >>41865490 #>>41866744 #
FactKnower69 ◴[] No.41865490[source]
Damn, I wonder what book you read to make you so smart?
replies(1): >>41866831 #
1. pxc ◴[] No.41866831[source]
Justine is an impressive hacker, several of whose projects have made their way to the front page of this site before. She's plenty smart and that's plain to see.

Calling her stupid isn't a good way to show her (or anyone) that she's wrong about this.