Nice Microsoft

another thread died so op could prove he doesnt undernstand licensing or free software.

I wonder who's behind these posts...

Attached: eternal_zipperhead.png (501x585, 10K)

people who understand how FOSS licenses work?

You're missing the point, faggots. The point is they renamed his project. The GPL wouldn't have prevented that.
Except I just showed you don't.

>yes laowai, make sure american companies can't use your code, only the chinese! heh heh, stupid laowai!
The eternal gook strikes again!

Attached: GPL_shill.jpg (501x585, 119K)

>his project
Just look at the source code.

These are right, but the guy is also right to complain. I mean, this is the issue. If you close your doors, you lock what you made from reaching other people, if you open the doors, big companies will run all over it and take all credit before other ordinary people ever get to what you did.

What is to be done, then.

please do the needful and link to where the code was copy/pasted

t. burden of proof

This. What would've truly solved his problem is a 4-clause BSD. The advertising clause would've made sure his original name showed up somewhere.

Or you could GPL it so corporations would be forced legally to share their changes.

>american companies
lol

Attached: mrboneswildrideneverends.jpg (1032x3180, 708K)

But that's GPL-incompatible, user.

But they are sharing their changes, user. Read the thread.
Just an added benefit.

>But they are sharing their changes
Then I see no issues at all.

So basically:
>a faggot licences his project with MIT
>Microsoft forks it and KEEPS IT OPEN SOURCE
>the faggot is mad for some reason

>retard claims ownership of an idea
Why are all FOSS people mentally ill?

>Why are all FOSS people mentally ill?
You know every company does the same with patents, right?

Then why didn't he keep his code private and patent it?

>booo hooo waaaahhh i want software for free booooooooo hoooooo why can't everything be free!!!!

Fuck outta here you pussies. It's called MAKING MONEY you fags.

Because code sharing is morally acceptable only when small developers do it amongst themselves?

It's not even forked IIRC. The code is completely different.

It's like complaining someone stole your joke's premise.

>but if you remove the Jews, my hypothetical utopia would totally come true

Okay, hitler

It goes both ways. You can take Ubuntu, change wallpaper and call it g-buntu, with no repercussions at all.

It's called EXPLOITING people and mother nature, Jackass

I'll make the logo

>doesn't notice a chink from a jew
Lurk more, you're not ready to post on Jow Forums yet.

Seize the means of this dick you communist faggot.

>BOOO HOOOO PEOPLE MAKE SOMETHING AND WANT TO SELL IT BOOOOOOOOOO WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH
real fucking pussy

The nature of living beings is exploitation. Without exploiting the resources available to you, you're literally a rock.

You are fully aware that humanity isn't fair and just? Like, you're not stuck in a childish mentality that the world is a Good Place™?

i wonder how many of the dumbshits spamming these threads use vscode

>he/him/they/them
Fuck the faggot.

>872 Me gusta

Attached: 1513470577821.gif (389x279, 2.27M)

let me get this straight - this jackass is claiming that he owns the idea of using a package manager for JS?

>use license (cucked or not)
>violate terms of license

why do retards make comments?

This is the stupidest twitter thread of all time.

Either it's their code or it isn't.

The MIT license isn't a patent of your idea. If Microsoft didn't fork your project and your code then the license doesn't do shit.

The MIT license doesn't allow you to remove the copyright owner's name from the copyright notice.

"The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software."

$20 says you haven't looked at the code, microsoft didn't copy paste a single fucking thing, they just used his idea but did it in their own way. That's perfectly legal and not at all unusual.

I don't care about what MS did or didn't do, I am simply correcting the many people here who apparently have no clue about permissive licenses.

No, they understand how it works, and they represented it correctly for this situation.

MS did nothing wrong, the people at the beginning of the thread understand how FOSS licenses work, the OP, and many others don't.

Your comment has no relevance especially since you seemingly don't even know the specifics of the situation, why bother posting at all?

>2017: pajeet steals your code on github
>2018: CEOjeet buys then owns millions of projects on github
>2019: Microsoft releases software you wrote that's now legally theirs

heh, nothing personell, sir

Attached: satya_nadella_microsoft_ceo_in_india_2017_bengaluru_quote_1487588076.jpg (725x381, 61K)

I literally posted the relevant paragraph from the license. Are you actually having trouble understanding a 3 paragraph software license?

Are you retarded?

The MIT license DOESN'T APPLY here, that's the fucking point.

IF they copied his code, THEN they would have to cite his project, they didn't copy his code, therefore they DON'T need to.
Further, THEIR code is open source as well, so he can feel free to use their code if he wants to.

You seem to be confused. Several posts at the top of the thread claimed that, *assuming the guy's claims are true*, he shouldn't be mad because he used the MIT license.
Please reread the thread before getting yourself worked up any further. Thank you.

Yeah, better argue over made up situations than the one this thread is actually referencing

Good point

I am explaining what twitter man is claiming and the implications of it with regard to copyright law. Whether or not his claims are true is another matter, which you are free to discuss without responding to me.
No need to get worked up over it :)

If Microsoft rewrote the commit history to hide stealing code as the this person claims, it would be really easy to prove in court that they broke the law. Why haven't they collected their millions of dollars yet?

and not a single commit was linked that day

Licenses are based off source code, not names. Retarded OP used a license that gave away those rights to anyone and got butthurt. Had he used GPL MS could still copy his project given they keep it open source and follow other rules laid out in GPL.

fpbp
/thread

>be an actual idiot
>be suprised when you are taken advantage of
>how could anyone do this to me????!

Attached: really makes you think.jpg (1024x576, 78K)

> butts
so it's a mentally ill leftist tranny cuckboi from california isn't it?

That's a chink kike dumb newfag
Yeah, but they have lobbied the government into providing welfare to them through patents
Non-kike patents only cover implementation
>be an actual idiot
>be surprised when someone does something you did
>I OWN THIS I DID IT FIRST
fix'd

gotta love it when MS buttfucks these retards, should happen more often

Microsoft is also using MIT on their project.

>The point is they renamed his project.
This is permitted by the MIT license.

The chinks are the jews of Asia.

Same old Microsoft playback

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

And so does the GPL.
They are based off names too. Debian and Mozilla had an entire conundrum over names, you newfag.

WTF is this low effort post?Are you such a faggot you can't bother to post the whole rant of this cuck?If i want to see it i need to go on shitter because you had to do too much work?Sage and reported.

You seemed to be confused.
It's not free as in beer.

fpbp
Fuck MIT/BSD/Apache/Mozilla, use superior GPL!

Attached: hurr.jpg (736x744, 106K)

Why is this thread on autosage?

Are janitors and mods working for Microsoft?

Thanks for removing the autosage. Do you mods have a mole who is working for Microsoft? I mean, this confirms it, but damn.

Attached: 404 not expected.jpg (641x641, 73K)

Dumb paranoid Jow Forumsfags

Nope, is not paranoia when you see it happening in your eyes. Then again, if that happened you are probably the Microsoft marketer. A marketer sent by Microsoft is less impressive than a corrupt mod paid by Microsoft.

Quads

>Violate confidentiality agreement
>Think anyone will actually give pity
Unprofessional and pathetic. Glad whomever that was got fired.

Attached: eating-spider.jpg (620x466, 46K)