undefined | Better HN

0 pointsTylerE11mo ago0 comments

I don't understand the idea that imposing some sort of infinite future obligation on an organization that can be easily made to not exist can possibly be viable.

Frankly I think this whole "movement" is kinda dumb and deeply misguided.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

wvbdmp11mo ago· 2 in thread

It’s not that hard to just publish your stuff when you’re done with it. I guess you could put it in escrow for, say, 10 years, in case you decide to do something with it later.

TylerEOP11mo ago

Almost all games include large amounts of licensed code. Without the source to that what good does having the source for the game matter? Or the server?

wvbdmp11mo ago

The licensing agreements just need to change accordingly such that dependencies will be available for preservation efforts. Laws can just make things happen. If you don’t want to participate in the market under these conditions, tough luck. Someone else will. There’s still plenty of room to make money from software.

scotty7911mo ago

It's not infinite. It's just obligation for the end of life. It's not that far from obligations for the real-world businesses to clean up after themselves when they finish operation.

What's dumb is that now businesses can infinitely sit on a piece of real estate they no longer use, at no cost to them. If that was real estate not IP they would at least have to pay property tax on it.

It's kind of curious that businesses don't pay property taxes on IP, like at all. That might have really improved the ecosystem.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse