Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.
-
Well yes and no you can release them going forward under a new licence. If you obtained your copy under the old license you can use it under the old license when you obtain a new copy you have a new license agreement. Thats absolutly possible to do.
Revoking licenses is alot harder though and changing the lizens from a foss on to another is often confusing and business inapropiate. However it is legal.Assuming newer versions are derived from code that was licensed GPL in the old version, the newer versions (which include new code) are also licensed GPL, whether the person writing the new code likes it or not.
-
I use the Duckstation flatpak funny enough
No, you are harassing and bullying poor Stenzek.
Typical Linux user, using Linux and stuff.
/s
-
Why should he get a say on how someone else installs the software on their own systems?
If I want to build an arch package instead, what business is that of his?
It's open source, the package the developer chooses to distribute doesn't affect your ability to create whatever kind of package for your own system you want.
-
LoL Jesus Christ, you kids are not alright. XD complete lack of understanding of personal responsibility.
complete lack of understanding of personal responsibility
-
Its moments like this I'm glad to be a nixos user lol.
Slap that shit in a flake and forget about it. No matter what updates the dev has, or what system the user has, its always gonna compile.
Fuck I love nix.
If it had genitals I'd fucking date it.
Least obsessed nixos user
-
complete lack of understanding of personal responsibility
Well done using the quote function. Welcome to the internet.
-
It's open source, the package the developer chooses to distribute doesn't affect your ability to create whatever kind of package for your own system you want.
Except this developer has created license terms that forbids the creation of "packages", so he clearly does want to affect my ability to do just that.
-
LoL Jesus Christ, you kids are not alright. XD complete lack of understanding of personal responsibility.
wrote last edited by [email protected]There's zero responsibility or liability on open source work. Specifically, this is licensed as CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, which has the following clauses:
Section 5 – Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liability.
a. Unless otherwise separately undertaken by the Licensor, to the extent possible, the Licensor offers the Licensed Material as-is and as-available, and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Licensed Material, whether express, implied, statutory, or other. This includes, without limitation, warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement, absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the presence or absence of errors, whether or not known or discoverable. Where disclaimers of warranties are not allowed in full or in part, this disclaimer may not apply to You
b. To the extent possible, in no event will the Licensor be liable to You on any legal theory (including, without limitation, negligence) or otherwise for any direct, special, indirect, incidental, consequential, punitive, exemplary, or other losses, costs, expenses, or damages arising out of this Public License or use of the Licensed Material, even if the Licensor has been advised of the possibility of such losses, costs, expenses, or damages. Where a limitation of liability is not allowed in full or in part, this limitation may not apply to You.
c. The disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liability provided above shall be interpreted in a manner that, to the extent possible, most closely approximates an absolute disclaimer and waiver of all liability.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en
Bref, the developer doesn't owe anyone anything beyond what is stated in the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, the GitHub TOS and the local laws where the developer lives.
-
I'll still be using it regardless..its not like its going to dissappear
-
There's zero responsibility or liability on open source work. Specifically, this is licensed as CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, which has the following clauses:
Section 5 – Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liability.
a. Unless otherwise separately undertaken by the Licensor, to the extent possible, the Licensor offers the Licensed Material as-is and as-available, and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Licensed Material, whether express, implied, statutory, or other. This includes, without limitation, warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement, absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the presence or absence of errors, whether or not known or discoverable. Where disclaimers of warranties are not allowed in full or in part, this disclaimer may not apply to You
b. To the extent possible, in no event will the Licensor be liable to You on any legal theory (including, without limitation, negligence) or otherwise for any direct, special, indirect, incidental, consequential, punitive, exemplary, or other losses, costs, expenses, or damages arising out of this Public License or use of the Licensed Material, even if the Licensor has been advised of the possibility of such losses, costs, expenses, or damages. Where a limitation of liability is not allowed in full or in part, this limitation may not apply to You.
c. The disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liability provided above shall be interpreted in a manner that, to the extent possible, most closely approximates an absolute disclaimer and waiver of all liability.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en
Bref, the developer doesn't owe anyone anything beyond what is stated in the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, the GitHub TOS and the local laws where the developer lives.
You don't seem to understand what I'm saying, but that's ok.
-
You don't seem to understand what I'm saying, but that's ok.
No, I understand exactly what you're saying, you're stating that people doing free work owe you things, and I'm stating that the licence absolves them of all obligations you claim they have.
Besides, you have not stated on what basis the developer "owes" you support besides attacking them and other commenters in this thread on an ad hominem basis.
If you wanted guaranteed support, you could ask the original author if you can get a maintenance and support contract for their application, where the limits and costs of that support are outlined in the contract.
-
I think he should just drop linux support.
no need to whine or complain.
"not doing linux builds anymore, here is the source, build it yourself if you want", done. -
No, I understand exactly what you're saying, you're stating that people doing free work owe you things, and I'm stating that the licence absolves them of all obligations you claim they have.
Besides, you have not stated on what basis the developer "owes" you support besides attacking them and other commenters in this thread on an ad hominem basis.
If you wanted guaranteed support, you could ask the original author if you can get a maintenance and support contract for their application, where the limits and costs of that support are outlined in the contract.
The first line is so completely, utterly wrong. XD thus not bothering with the rest.
Thanks for playing and better luck next time!
-
The first line is so completely, utterly wrong. XD thus not bothering with the rest.
Thanks for playing and better luck next time!
Please explain how it is wrong.
-
There's zero responsibility or liability on open source work. Specifically, this is licensed as CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, which has the following clauses:
Section 5 – Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liability.
a. Unless otherwise separately undertaken by the Licensor, to the extent possible, the Licensor offers the Licensed Material as-is and as-available, and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Licensed Material, whether express, implied, statutory, or other. This includes, without limitation, warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement, absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the presence or absence of errors, whether or not known or discoverable. Where disclaimers of warranties are not allowed in full or in part, this disclaimer may not apply to You
b. To the extent possible, in no event will the Licensor be liable to You on any legal theory (including, without limitation, negligence) or otherwise for any direct, special, indirect, incidental, consequential, punitive, exemplary, or other losses, costs, expenses, or damages arising out of this Public License or use of the Licensed Material, even if the Licensor has been advised of the possibility of such losses, costs, expenses, or damages. Where a limitation of liability is not allowed in full or in part, this limitation may not apply to You.
c. The disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liability provided above shall be interpreted in a manner that, to the extent possible, most closely approximates an absolute disclaimer and waiver of all liability.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en
Bref, the developer doesn't owe anyone anything beyond what is stated in the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, the GitHub TOS and the local laws where the developer lives.
Dude seems like a troll, just quit feeding it, downvote him and move on. Engaging just makes them more persistently stupid.
-
Dude seems like a troll, just quit feeding it, downvote him and move on. Engaging just makes them more persistently stupid.
Oh, 100% troll, I'm just enjoying watching them dig their own hole and run out of responses.
-
Please explain how it is wrong.
Lol why? You don't give a shit. No one who has commented in this exchange does.
And that's fine as far as it goes, but let's not be disingenuous and pretend we're righteous.
Forget it, Jake. It's the internet.
-
Lol why? You don't give a shit. No one who has commented in this exchange does.
And that's fine as far as it goes, but let's not be disingenuous and pretend we're righteous.
Forget it, Jake. It's the internet.
You've dodged my question. Please explain how what I've stated is wrong.
-
You've dodged my question. Please explain how what I've stated is wrong.
Telling you I'm not going to answer you because I don't believe you care and it's a waste of at least my own time isn't dodging your question. I told you exactly. Waste of time.
I owe you nothing.
-
Telling you I'm not going to answer you because I don't believe you care and it's a waste of at least my own time isn't dodging your question. I told you exactly. Waste of time.
I owe you nothing.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Then I don't know why you're here in the first place.
I suggest you delete your comments if you're going to attack people ad hominem by calling them a "cry baby" instead of clearly stating your opinion and refuse to have a conversation about it. You won't have people replying to you about a conversation you don't want to have.
As you said, it's a waste of your time, and a waste of everyone else's time.
