undefined | Better HN

0 pointskube-system25d ago0 comments

So, anyone should be able to sell something called "Coca Cola"?

0 comments

Nitpick: that’s trademark, not copyright. While it’s bundled under IP, it’s a different beast altogether.

The above claim was in fact regarding “intellectual property”. If you break it down, there are plenty of IP rights which make a lot of sense.

Here’s one for copyright:

“Do you think any corporation should be allowed to make closed source forks of GPL software?”

senko24d ago

If there’s no copyright, there’s no closed source. You get their code, decompile/disassemble and reuse as you see fit.

You might argue that doesn't help much if they never distribute that code (only runs on their servers). Here’s the inconvenient truth: GPL already allows that. Anyone can take a GPL codebase, do any modifications they want, run it forever, and never contribute back. You’d need AGPL to forbid that. GPL is only concerned if you further distribute the modifications.

Next one?

kube-systemOP24d ago

A lack of copyright does not mean secrets cannot exist. In fact, it would heavily incentivize it.

> Anyone can take a GPL codebase, do any modifications they want, run it forever, and never contribute back.

Only privately or over a network, but it prohibits distribution of binaries without source. This is the primary reason the GPL exists.

1 more reply

lamonade24d ago

Here’s the convenient truth: GPL doesnt allow distributing the binary without distributing the code. Next one?

1 more reply

bjourne24d ago

What a dumb question. Got any more?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

senko24d ago

Nitpick: that’s trademark, not copyright. While it’s bundled under IP, it’s a different beast altogether.

kube-systemOP24d ago

The above claim was in fact regarding “intellectual property”. If you break it down, there are plenty of IP rights which make a lot of sense.

Here’s one for copyright:

“Do you think any corporation should be allowed to make closed source forks of GPL software?”

senko24d ago

If there’s no copyright, there’s no closed source. You get their code, decompile/disassemble and reuse as you see fit.

Next one?

kube-systemOP24d ago

A lack of copyright does not mean secrets cannot exist. In fact, it would heavily incentivize it.

> Anyone can take a GPL codebase, do any modifications they want, run it forever, and never contribute back.

Only privately or over a network, but it prohibits distribution of binaries without source. This is the primary reason the GPL exists.

1 more reply

lamonade24d ago

Here’s the convenient truth: GPL doesnt allow distributing the binary without distributing the code. Next one?

1 more reply

bjourne24d ago

What a dumb question. Got any more?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse