←back to thread

156 points rntn | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.212s | source
Show context
mslansn[dead post] ◴[] No.44407124[source]
[flagged]
bruce511 ◴[] No.44407339[source]
Simplistically yes, because many see copyright as the thing that protects corporate interest from the social hacker.

The reality of course is more complicated. Without copyright there's no GPL. Which I guess is fine if you're in the OSS camp more than the FSF camp. MIT and BSD licenses basically (functionally) give up copyright.

Copyright is also what allows for hybrids like the BSL which protect "little guys" from large cloud providers like AWS etc.

Copyright allows VC startups to at least start out life as Open Source (before pivoting later.)

Of course thus is all in the context of software copyright. Other copyrights (music, books etc) are equally nuanced.

And there are other forms of IP protections as well (patents, trademarks) which are distinct from the copyright concept.

So no, I don't think most people here are against copyright (patents are a different story.)

replies(3): >>44407554 #>>44407677 #>>44411002 #
1. globular-toast ◴[] No.44411002[source]
> MIT and BSD licenses basically (functionally) give up copyright.

MIT/BSD is like putting pristine steel out in the rain. Rust will get to it before long. GPL is like painting it to protect it for generations to come.