• it_a_me@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Section 4 is what gets me. Your rights are temporary and revokable meaning the the rest of the license doesn’t matter in the long term

    ## Section 4: Termination, suspension and variation
    1. We may suspend, terminate or vary the terms of this license and any access to the code at any time, without notice, for any reason or no reason, in respect of any licensee, group of licensees or all licensees including as may be applicable any sub-licensees.
    
    • thejevans@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, that just leaves the door open for enshittification. “Trust me bro” vibes. This license needs a better Ulysses pact.

      • Chreutz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Rossmann stated that this license is to keep fake versions riddled with ads or similar scammy stuff from mudding the water. I’m sure he agrees that this is not optimal.

        • thejevans@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I saw the video. There has to be a way to accomplish that without leaving the possibility of retroactively changing the license in the future.

          Thankfully, the plugins that I’ve looked at are released with an open source license.

          I know I will not be putting effort into porting my subscriptions over as long as the license allows them to fuck users over if company ownership changes its mind or if it gets sold.

          It seems cool, but even the documentation is locked away behind a link that requires authentication, so it’s going to be annoying for anyone to try to make a plugin. I want to make a youtube plugin with sponsorblock, so I reached out to ask how to access the documentation basically when Louis’s video went live and have yet to hear a response.

          Also, polycentric is going to need some form of moderation because, as it stands, it’s chock full of racial slurs and other awful stuff.

          • andruid@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Same way Firefox does. Trade marks. They want to protect the reputation of their trade marks, that is enforceable, and then they can let people fork to their hearts content (waterfox, iceweasle, librewolf, the tor browser, etc).

        • moonpiedumplings@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          My problem with this is, what stops people from simply violating the license anyways? Is futo going to go after every license violator? Do they even have the power to do so?

          I’ve seen people make adware versions of closed source apps as well, so even not having the code public and online doesn’t stop people.