• cjk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    126
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    Apple deployed a library I wrote to every mac on the world, and additionally bundles it with Xcode.

    Apple users reported some bugs, that‘s how I found out.

    I never heard a word from them. No patches, no bug reports, nothing, they didn’t even bother to refresh the bundled version.

    I think in the meantime they removed it from macOS but still bundle it with Xcode.

    I mean, I didn’t any money, but some appreciation would’ve been nice, and a version refresh…

    If you are curious: it is this library: https://github.com/ckruse/CFPropertyList

    Edit: appreciation as in: a mail with a notice that they did so.

      • cjk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        Yeah, well. What should I say. I wanted to use it in a commercial project, too :)

        • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          34
          ·
          23 days ago

          You can use your library for commercial projects that you have. Just have dual license that requires payment for commercial use or something similar. You don’t have to pay yourself

          • cjk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            22 days ago

            To be honest, I wasn’t aware of this option when I wrote this library. Nowadays I would chose this path.

            • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              21 days ago

              I think that’s why Github suggests MIT as default. Unaware people will just put that. Most open source people just code things they want without thinking much on other aspects. We really need some sort of enforcement to stop companies banking on voluntary work done for the community.

          • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            22 days ago

            Here’s the core issue. The developer didn’t know his rights, and made a mistake. I’m not criticizing, people make a career dealing with crap like this. But if you want to make a business out of something, it’s worth it to do some research or talk to a lawyer. I believe the MIT license has its place but, from what the OP said, this isn’t it.

            • cjk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              22 days ago

              I did not want to make a business out of this library. I don’t want money for it.

              All I would’ve wanted is that the people at Apple would’ve given me a heads up beforehand, so I would’ve been prepared for it and not caught on surprise. And a that they do a version upgrade when I release a new bugfix release.

              This is not a license issue. I was well aware of the consequences when I chose the MIT license. This is not about money.

              • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                22 days ago

                You specifically said you chose the MIT license because you wanted to use it in commercial projects. That’s business, no matter how small. As the owner of the property, you could have used any and all licenses available to you. Also, if you wanted to require users of your code to attribute or notify you, you could have. If you want to be disappointed in their behavior that’s perfectly fine, too. Corporations usually disappoint if you have any altruistic expectations of them.

                • cjk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  13
                  ·
                  22 days ago

                  Ah, that‘s the angle you’re coming from.

                  In this regard you are right. I could’ve chosen AGPL and use it in my commercial project nonetheless. I wasn’t aware of that at the time, and that was a mistake.

                  That said, I don’t expect all users to notify me. But if a company like Apple, with millions of users, exposes me to even a fraction of its users - then yes. I expect a mail beforehand. I did not sign up for this.

                  But I agree with your last part again ;)

            • Wilzax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              22 days ago

              Agreed. Free licenses should NEVER be applied to Apple-specific tools. They don’t want to help the FOSS community, so we shouldn’t help them back. Make them pay for it, or make them make their own version.

    • Matt/D@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      23 days ago

      Really funny/interesting that they use an external library to handle a format that they created!

      • cjk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        23 days ago

        Yeah, I was surprised, too. I guess they implemented stuff using Ruby and didn’t bother to write an in-house implementation. 🤷‍♂️

    • Nighed@sffa.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      23 days ago

      It’s probably a single dev that made the decision, then moves onto something else. They (probably?) don’t have the ability to just raise a recurring PO etc to easily pay you and don’t care enough to worth through the paperwork.

      If you had a paid licencing model they may have done it, or just found another lib/ wrote their own.

  • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    103
    ·
    23 days ago

    Make your MIT-licensed library big enough that the corpos use it, then switch it to AGPL just before you add a really important and tricky feature they’ve been waiting for.

  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    23 days ago

    I really wish we could have a license like if your revenue is 5mil + you have to kick in something to the devs

  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    23 days ago

    So how difficult would it be to update the library to include a blacklist to those big corpos taking advantage of your code?

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        23 days ago

        I really like the GPL license for that reason. Take it, use it, be merry. But don’t you dare use it in a closed source project, and you have to give me credit

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      22 days ago

      Just use a GPL license instead. It allows use with credit, but requires that usage also be released for free. Meaning that it can’t be used by corpos and their closed-source projects.