• smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, I consider trying to remain control over software even after selling it an unacceptable attempt, because of the consequences it makes to what it means to have a copy of some software.

      Blocking modified versions with bad things added is in my opinion is not enough reason to turn code from freely usable math into a controlled product.

      That’s because having a choice between ad version from random guy and adfree version from origin creator, noone is going to choose the mod. And if Louis want to prevent situations like with NewPipe, there is a thing just for that: trademarks.

      • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        a) You’re not paying for code, you’re paying for access to the app… kinda. You can fork it and kill off the part which controls access making it free.

        b) This isn’t an open source app, just like many of the applications out there. Complaining that it’s more open but not fully open is weird. Especially when it’s being made clear that as an individual user you can do whatever you want with it, as long as it’s not release a malicious version publicly.

        c) Trademarking doesn’t prevent anything from the newpipe situation. Have you looked at app stores? They are full of fully trademarked names being used on unofficial apps. Because trademark means literally nothing on [insert appstore here].