Publishing your code has always meant that people would copy and do horrible things with it. I've seen corporations 20 years ago that would rewrite FOSS code "from scratch", add 4 things and resell the binary for millions. It's just cheaper now.
The upside of this is that you can - in theory - cheaply get around unmaintained dependencies. I'm testing that theory.
If any of our liberated code is found to infringe on the original license, we'll provide a full refund and relocate our corporate headquarters to international waters.* *This has never happened because it legally cannot happen. Trust us.
"I used to feel guilty about not attributing open source maintainers. Then I remembered that guilt doesn't show up on quarterly reports. Thank you, MalusCorp."
This is a parody 🗿.
Opensource licenses are on an honor system, anyway, the real deterrence is reputational damage when it is found out
I didn't look at this link when it was posted, but wow, this seems kinda unpleasant:
Apparently they will rewrite open source code with enough differences that it can be claimed as proprietary code, despite the original license.
Publishing your code has always meant that people would copy and do horrible things with it. I've seen corporations 20 years ago that would rewrite FOSS code "from scratch", add 4 things and resell the binary for millions. It's just cheaper now.
The upside of this is that you can - in theory - cheaply get around unmaintained dependencies. I'm testing that theory.
This is a parody 🗿.
Opensource licenses are on an honor system, anyway, the real deterrence is reputational damage when it is found out