You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
5 points

One of the “powers” of OSS is that the license usually required changes to be fed back upstream.

If Meta were not to do that the authors of Lemmy could ask someone like EFF to take legal proceeding against them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Facebook can easily circumvent most requirements like that if the license isn’t invasivively copyleft. Usually web standards have permissive licenses.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

i’m not sure if ActivityPub is copyleft or not. meta might be able to build proprietary features on top of it if the license isn’t viral.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

If it is copyleft, they will probably try to reimplement it permissively.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

ActivityPub itself is just a protocol, everybody can reimplement it. Lemmy and Mastodon are AGPL3 and thus copyleft along with “you must release source code for your server”.

Though if Meta does anything, I’d expect it to be written from scratch and MIT licensed. Companies don’t like to get near anything GPL as long as they can avoid it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@beehaw.org

Create post

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Community stats

  • 2.7K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.4K

    Posts

  • 82K

    Comments