I highly suggest starting to familiarize ourselves with federated git repos. I‘m testing forgejo atm hoping to be able to host it publicly at some point. That way, once something is out there, its pretty much everywhere.
Federated git repos doesn’t mean that the source code will be replicated across instances. It just means you can do things like create tickets and pull requests across instances.
When I create a fork (in the web UI) does my instance not git clone from the source instance? Not going around cloning random federated repos I can see, but…
hmmmm… I see your point. Maybe I wasnt explaining my point clear enough. Right now, I cant see someones fork of some software if I’m on some gitlab which is not federated afaik. I should have said discoverability I guess. Does that make more sense?
The organization selected the European Union for their headquarters and computer infrastructure, due to members’ concerns that a software project repository hosted in the United States could be removed if a malicious actor made bad faith copyright claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
In June 2022 the Software Freedom Conservancy’s“Give Up Github” campaign (in response to the GitHub Copilot licensing controversy) promoted Codeberg as an alternative to GitHub.
Unfortunately using codeberg itself is kinda crap. Its not the worst thing in the world, but it still has zero discoverability , and is missing features like code search.
Yeah, I get that. But I dont think that its possible to really dmca every fork of a repo on 20 countries without running out of resources at some point because when one fork is taken down, people will make 10 more. the important part is discoverability imo. Feel free to educate me in case this is missing a point.
At least not one that’s hosted in a country where the IP mafia has any power, which is unfortunately most countries excluding places like Russia or China where you probably wouldn’t want to host it anyhow due to a variety of other, uh… issues
As long as you host the checksums elsewhere so that users can verify the repo hasn’t been tampered with, you can host files in China or Russia just fine.
What kind of logic is that? It is perfectly reasonable to care about human rights and totalitarianism but not for copyrights. In fact it seems a bit questionable that you would use the speeding ticket of online rule violations as an excuse to completely discard any other moral considerations.
Ultimately it’s your choice of course, but still. Questionable reasoning
The problem with this argument is that you are ruling out entire countries for the acts of corrupt governments. Thing is there is no such thing as a clean government. Everybody has skeletons in their closet.
You can definitely care about whatever you want. Human rights aren’t the only potential issue though, but there’s things like eg. do you trust that you’ll be able to retain control of the site. So for example if you set it up in Russia and you’re not Russian, do you trust the Russian government not to pull the rug out from under your feet at some point?
Well they might, even if I you were Russian. But that’s what off-site backups are there for. It’s less likely for them to pull control than it is for a Western platform though, so still a win vs. Github.
The Internet Archive operates under the principle of fair use, which allows the use of copyrighted material for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. They also adhere to legal guidelines and protocols to avoid infringing on copyright laws. Additionally, they often rely on user-contributed content, public domain materials, and works with expired copyrights to build their digital library, which helps mitigate copyright issues. However, they do occasionally face legal challenges or takedown requests, and they respond to those according to the law.
It was a settlement. The devs decided, for reasons that are not public, that it would be easier to just pay Nintendo some money and take down the emulator than to fight them in court. It’s very possible (even likely) that they figured it would be more expensive to fight Nintendo’s lawyers than to just pay a fixed amount up front.
That’s quite often the case with thee issues - it’s simply a finance game by the player with the deep pockets - they can afford to effectively bankrupt a smaller player who may have done nothing wrong.
They don’t actually provide decryption keys, the user has to either extract them from their own Switch or find them elsewhere online. However, it could be argued by Nintendo that using an unreleased game ROM for testing proves that the devs themselves were guilty of piracy, and were therefore somehow condoning the use of their emulator for piracy.
Either way, we won’t know how well Nintendo’s arguments would have held up in court, because the devs settled rather than fight it out.
Since they’re back at it again I have to jump onto my alt and re-share the fact that I totally backed up Yuzu’s source code, their progress reports, their Github issues pages + pull requests, and all the latest available binaries right before it got taken off of Github. No illicit materials in my archive (ROMS/Firmwares/Keys). Freely available as a torrent.
In case this is a real question: AFAIK* that is not possible for them to do. The project was open source and it accepted code contributions from everyone using a FOSS license. This means:
Everyone who has seen the code explicitly has rights to redistribute it, and this right cannot be revoked
The core team does not own the entirety of the code - to transfer ownership to Nintendo they would have to get approval from every single contributor that ever made a pull request that got merged. This is impractical to say the least
So no, there is no and there cannot be legal basis for Nintendo to claim copyright on Yuzu. They might have other claims, but I won’t weigh in on how good they might be because I’m way out of my depth already.
I’m actually making a bunch of assumptions about Yuzu’s licence and number of contributors that I haven’t bothered to check, so take this with a grain of salt. I’m still pretty confident about point 1 though, I’d be really surprised if this was a wrong assumption, and it alone is enough.
No they can change the license.ots of Foss products doing that lately. It can ways be formed from theast foss version though. But I have no idea whaticense yuzu used.
Anyway, I just read through the settlement and I didn’t see any explicit transfer of ownership of he code in there. I’m not a lawyer though, there are some things in there I may not understand the implications of.
FWIW I am not one of the jerks who downvoted you, I think your comment contributes to discussion even if I’m the end it turns out to be wrong. I think people just see the downvote button as a “disagree” or “you’re wrong” button, don’t let it get to you.
Don’t worry about it, the angry edit was meant to be humorous- in general I agree that it’s a mistake to let downvotes upset you.
(And because I’m the admin of my own instance, the votes are made visible through the UI. So if I wanted to be a vindictive weirdo about it, I could… 😉)
Add comment