We now note that that we do not waive our attribution requirements for Spritely Goblins, which are present in Apache v2 (and for that matter, CC BY, CC BY-SA, and most FOSS licenses) https://codeberg.org/spritely/goblins/pulls/998/files
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber attribution is the single most valuable thing a person or a project could get imho. But i guess this is due to the fact the most of the tech persons in the past were either academics or people with high hacker ethics. I miss the times were tech especially in opensource was about getting the badge to be a smartass or a project everyone looks up to. Nowadays even opensource projects just try to be funded or bought by a third party
-
@fogti I care about both copyleft and attribution.
Which is why the libre #roleplaying #game I’ve been working on for over two decades now¹² has a seven page thank you section, including four pages of attribution for artists.
And naturally sticks to the licenses they use.
And it’s why I make sure to only use creations under compatible licenses.
And this is what I expect from others, too.
¹ https://www.1w6.org
² source: https://hg.sr.ht/~arnebab/ews/browse@fogti the reason why copyleft is important is that there are technical means to make it neigh impossible to create derivative works.
Abolishing copyright would therefore require to have a rule that every creation has to be accompanied with the preferred form to make modifications to it.
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber I've always considered it to be important to respect even when it is optional. Tangerine had an attribution page that reproduced the license/copyright notices for the entire dependency graph. I had all the dependencies vendored, so the page was generated automatically from the sources. Mollytime will have a similar feature (eventually) once we're done rebuilding the UI and I figure out a way to do it without vendoring everything.
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber If someone publishes something very clearly based on my work (or someone else's) I will be disproportionately offended if there's no attribution, because it's rude.
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber I share a similar stance. While I strongly prefer share-alike provisions, attribution is by far the most important. When I chose my preferred post-floss license1, I chose one2 that has no share-alike clause, but does have an attribution one.
Because while I like the idea of FLOSS, I absolutely do not like that I can't restrict who can use my software.
︎
-
@cwebber I've always considered it to be important to respect even when it is optional. Tangerine had an attribution page that reproduced the license/copyright notices for the entire dependency graph. I had all the dependencies vendored, so the page was generated automatically from the sources. Mollytime will have a similar feature (eventually) once we're done rebuilding the UI and I figure out a way to do it without vendoring everything.
@cwebber i think over the decades my hopes for my FOSS work burned down from a big important career making big important things, to hoping anyone at all finds my stuff to be useful for something, to i guess i can entertain a few dozen people for a few minutes every now and then, to ok i get it pausing your music to listen to worse music is too much to ask, to, look, i drew some pictures do you like pictures
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber Too many folks in and around FOSS think "nobody has taken enforcement action over this, therefore nobody actually cares about it." It's wrong and it signals that the person is thinking about FOSS in terms of what they can extract rather than a collaboration among peers.
-
@cwebber i think over the decades my hopes for my FOSS work burned down from a big important career making big important things, to hoping anyone at all finds my stuff to be useful for something, to i guess i can entertain a few dozen people for a few minutes every now and then, to ok i get it pausing your music to listen to worse music is too much to ask, to, look, i drew some pictures do you like pictures
@cwebber and the idea that the outcome of this is my work being slurped up into a training set for my contributions to be misattributed to the theft machine, and nobody knowing i exist is not ok
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber Attribution is pretty much the only thing I ever cared about (and I still care about it, very much). I also do not believe prominent people when they say they "don't care" about attribution. Like, really? So if someone had never credited your work your entire career and/or claimed it for themselves, you think you'd be in the same position as you are now? Or is attribution only important when you're on your way up the ladder?
I have a *lot* of feelings on attribution, in fact. -
@cwebber Attribution is pretty much the only thing I ever cared about (and I still care about it, very much). I also do not believe prominent people when they say they "don't care" about attribution. Like, really? So if someone had never credited your work your entire career and/or claimed it for themselves, you think you'd be in the same position as you are now? Or is attribution only important when you're on your way up the ladder?
I have a *lot* of feelings on attribution, in fact.@cwebber Honestly, for a more negative take, any prominent individual in a community who says that "attribution doesn't matter" immediately sets off alarm bells in my head.
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber attribution seems like the most basic social reciprocity available and, as you mentioned, probably the most important. "where did you get *awesome idea from*? "oh *awesom idea* came from *this person*. aren't they neat?"
-
@cwebber and the idea that the outcome of this is my work being slurped up into a training set for my contributions to be misattributed to the theft machine, and nobody knowing i exist is not ok
@cwebber but ultimately i'm not interested in taking anyone to court. i don't have the money to burn for that, and the impact on my health would probably be unlikely to have been worth it to me. so all i get out of a license is a statement of intent. people generally are good about respecting the intent of the license, so that's worked out well so far (even if it's been mostly not applicable anyway). but these ai companies don't give a shit, and i'm at a loss of what to do about it
-
@ArneBab Calling a set of laws technical (in contrast to what it imo actually is: a social technology) when the only way it can be enacted (e.g. in contrast to cryptography) is through courts, seems absurd to me.
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber i'm an artist/academic/educator and i consider making foss to be a part of my practice. any kind of attribution helps me to make the case that my work has "impact" which in turn helps me to keep my job. a lot of foss projects that are related to academia in some way will request that papers resulting from research that makes use of the project include an actual bibliographical citation—i assume for similar reasons. tbh i think this prominent foss person is full of it
-
@cwebber I agree. I extremely dislike copyright (and would like it to be abolished even if that makes copyleft licenses (even more) useless), but I think that attribution and often also proper citation/references is extremely important.
-
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber absolutely, attribution is the most important part of the whole thing. Citing your sources seems to me to be one of the most basic parts of human decency.
-
Btw I have heard at least one prominent FOSS person (I'm choosing to not fill their notifications here by identifying them) that nobody cares about attribution requirements (and particularly not enforcing them). But to me, attribution is what I care about MORE than any other licensing requirements, more than copyleft "share-alike" style provisions, etc.
If you feel similarly, it would be good to hear on this thread. Perhaps even copying a similar notice into your project is a good idea.
@cwebber I care about attribution
-
@LunaDragofelis This is not about DRM. It is about only sharing obfuscated, compiled code that you may be able to mod, but not to improve efficiently.
Or only sharing a squashed image while you yourself use the multilayer source instead that you did not share.
Or only sharing the final encoded version of a song while you retain the multitrack master to rework it regularly.
Or only sharing low-quality screenshots of a book you create from Emacs orgmode sources you keep private.
@fogti @cwebber -
@cwebber absolutely, attribution is the most important part of the whole thing. Citing your sources seems to me to be one of the most basic parts of human decency.
