this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
676 points (97.1% liked)

Linux

48698 readers
1341 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] qaz@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Why did you license your comment?

[–] Abnorc@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

He doesn't want to let us use his comment for commercial purposes, which is a shame. I don't know how I'm going to pay for dinner now.

[–] PlantObserver@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

You joke but when "media" outlets boldly steal 90% of their content directly from reddit posts and comments without attribution for commercial use, maybe including a license isnt crazy anymore?

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 6 points 11 months ago

They're already stealing the content. You think a license is going to stop them from doing it anyway? Who says this license is valid in any jurisdiction that the comment is being held on (yay federation!)? Who says that a random user submitting something to a public forum where data is stored by third parties in order to run that forum can be licensed anyway?

If my server makes me money in some form, and you submit stuff after the fact and license it yourself, that doesn't magically apply nor does it bind the server owners to anything. Unfortunately the comment you submit to a homeserver doesn't actually belong to you at that point.

Case and point, the community we're in !linux says licensed under CC BY 3.0, and this user claims CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, but the community has not necessarily given him the right to post ANY license attached to his comment and still post. conflicting licenses would be at play. And this is ignoring that lemmy.ml may not have granted either !linux OR the user to apply their own license to content, you know... since they're storing the data and own the server/service.

It would take even the most junior of lawyer to get it thrown out. Especially since it's fair use to report on the goings on of public. Even if that reporting agency makes money by reporting on the comment.

[–] Abnorc@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

It's a bit out there, but I see why he does it. It is a shame that the media has sunk to such lows.

[–] 0x69@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Christ your comment is the funniest thing I've read in a while. Thank you for the laugh

[–] dan@upvote.au 3 points 11 months ago

My comment is licensed under GPL. If you look at it when you reply, it means your reply is a derivative work and must retain the license. Have fun.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Womble@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't think linking to a licence that increases the rights of third parties to do things with your words (over the default all rights reserved) will do very much for you there.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Nobody knows yet 🤷 I'll do it anyway

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think you're missing my point. You are giving people more rights to use your comments by putting them under CC licence than not putting them under any.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I think you're missing the point. It's a non-commercial license. Non-commercial AI is completely fine by me. Commercial is not.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No, how was I supposed to infer that you were fine with non-commercial AI from your two letter response to why you were licencing your comment?

I think its fairly naive to think that linking to a licence will do anything to stop commercial AI but not open ones, but you go for it if you think it's worthwhile.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 0 points 11 months ago

Thanks. I care very much what you think.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0