• Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Really scummy on their part.

    Anyone is free to build it themselves. Someone could even distribute their own build from the same source under a different name completely legally.

    They bank on users being lazy and then pay for the convenience.

    • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Anyone is free to build it themselves. Someone could even distribute their own build from the same source under a different name completely legally.

      You could just as easily in the spirit of this community do it with the same name and code, same way they do it for cracked games. Don’t tell me it’s not done because there are security concerns, you have no way to tell if cracked games contain secret malware in them yet people still distribute and download those.

      They bank on users being lazy and then pay for the convenience.

      And also pirates to not outright rip them off, which seems to be working for some reason…

    • upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      I don’t think that’s true, correct me if I am wrong though. There are still other requirements you have to follow for the GPL3 license if you wanted to distribute it legally.

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 minutes ago

        GPLv3 is a copy left license. If you legally acquire the source code (it’s public already, so anyone does), GPLv3 does not put any restrictions on you when it comes to building, selling, distributing, modifying the code.

        I pointed out the name because trademark law is seperate.

        And yes, GPLv3 has some requirements like attribution (mention the original developer somewhere), and you have to point out where to get the source code (already public in this case). Also, if you make any changes to the source code you must provide those changes to anyone you distribute too under the same license.

        These restrictions apply to eg. UNIT3D too. Some (most) torrent trackers seem to violate the requirement to provide their changes to their users and want to keep them private. But I never asked them whether they’d provide me their source.

        Otherwise GPLv3 does not pose much restrictions on it’s users, especially not on distribution.