Follow

Interesting a bot at Microsoft is forking some open source repos and removing the license and copyright information. For example here is cups (the printing system used by both mac and Linux) github.com/microsoft/cups/comm That's actually very illegal.

@carlschwan yeah, that commit changes he license from Apache 2.0 to MIT, which are compatible so that might be fine - but also makes it say "Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation." which indeed does not seem fine at all

@raboof Apache and MIT are compatible in the sense that you can use code licensed under one license with code using the other one. But it doesn't mean you can change the license, only the copyright holder can. (INAL)

@carlschwan IANAL either, but my understanding is you can combine MIT-licensed code and Apache2-licensed code, and distribute the resulting aggregate under MIT. You could say that's sort of what happens by changing the top-level LICENCE. That definitely doesn't make misattributing the copyright OK though.

@raboof that's maybe true and also one of the reasons why I'm adding reuse statement in every single files in my projects. At least it makes it clear what license and author contributed to a file. reuse.software/

For now, I opened github.com/OpenPrinting/cups/i and will let Apple and Microsoft fight themselves 😜

@raboof @carlschwan and to change the License, you generally need an OK from all Copyright holders

which in projects without a CLA is every single contributor.

@carlschwan looks like this was done in may *and* some people have actually been working on this codebase instead of the original?

@carlschwan and why does it have both a LICENSE and a LICENSE.txt file?

@dr0i Oh nice, it seems that complaining on the web works :p

@carlschwan Seems to be a honest mistake: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29685628

But it’s fun to see that everybody think of Microsoft as evil by default. Not without reasons, of course :D

@carlschwan brutal shit. must be reported to FSF and OSI, I think.

@carlschwan why the whole "embrace, extend, extinguish", when no regulators will hold you to account anyway, right?

@carlschwan
Over and over again I just want to make them pay their dues. How can we still fertilise this platform with our code. There is already great software for #selfhosting like #Gitea and at least one promising project available to address #federation: notabug.org/peers/forgefed

@carlschwan MS admitted it was a bug (a bot applied new repository template - the commit even says "Updating LICENSE to template content")

@carlschwan I read that the project to rewrite core utils used by Linux in Rust is being done with an MIT license instead of GNU.

@carlschwan IMO it's a good thing that MS posted a response (to HN) quickly.

Since this problem has affected two repos so far (grpc_bench and cups), I wanted to see where else the license changed like that. Unfortunately the "Contribution activity" page for the bot account (github.com/microsoftopensource) is empty. Does anyone know how to get the full contribution list of this bot across all of Github?

Sign in to participate in the conversation
FLOSS.social

For people who care about, support, or build Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS).