Yeah, this topic is seriously conflicting for me...
I dislike Luke-Jr, but I also dislike CoinHunter.
I dislike the DMCA (and copyright in general), but I also dislike SolidCoin.
Really though, this is just going to give CoinHunter more ammo for martyrdom argument.
Hey now, there's some common ground between Luke-Jr and CoinHunter... they both have a persecution complex.
Topic: Solidcoin DMCA takedown - page 3. (Read 10246 times)
Bitcoin is about absolute freedom (mostly in regards to data), which is why it boggles my mind that someone who preaches freedom of all data, would go ahead and do a DMCA takedown on an infant open source e-currency...
"Absolute freedom" is absolute evil. You are no better than Coinhunter and his 13 million premine.
Disgusting...
Many people took this stand against SOPA yet they make a hero of a guy who :-
1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins
2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources.
3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like.
4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins
This is all libelous lies.1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins
2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources.
3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like.
4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins
I don't know anyone here who made a "hero" of Luke-Jr for his 51% attack on CC.
Most people actually found it repulsive, so I don't know where exactly you are getting that from.
First, it wasn't a "51% attack" in the sense most people take that to mean: I didn't steal any coins, time-travel, or anything of the sort. Second, more people did express support of my CLC shutdown than complained about it (the complainers were basically just a small handful of scammers who I had foiled, and made numerous venomous libel posts giving some people the impression there was a problem with it)Most people actually found it repulsive, so I don't know where exactly you are getting that from.
Bitcoin is about absolute freedom (mostly in regards to data), which is why it boggles my mind that someone who preaches freedom of all data, would go ahead and do a DMCA takedown on an infant open source e-currency...
No, Bitcoin is about a decentralized currency. Anything more is subjective. "Absolute freedom" is absolute evil. Bitcoin provides a useful monetary system for the Tonal number system, which is my primary reason for involvement.Heh that's pretty funny . You say "SolidCoin ripped off Bitcoin" then immediately follow with "Ok the license allows what SolidCoin did but it's still ripping it off! Guys! Come on...."
Many people took this stand against SOPA yet they make a hero of a guy who :-
1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins
2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources.
3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like.
4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins
Well, with those sorts of morals I'm not sure what else to expect from some here. Flip... flop. Can't have it both ways you heroes. It doesn't even matter if you don't like SolidCoin, to step down to the filthy level of Luke-Jr is telling how desperate some have become. If anyone wonders how some awful crap gets passed by our governments look no further than the behaviour shown by a few here to get their "Revenge" on something they don't like.
Dude, just learn to understand the license. It allows "ripping off" BUT it doesn't allow removing the license text.Many people took this stand against SOPA yet they make a hero of a guy who :-
1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins
2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources.
3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like.
4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins
Well, with those sorts of morals I'm not sure what else to expect from some here. Flip... flop. Can't have it both ways you heroes. It doesn't even matter if you don't like SolidCoin, to step down to the filthy level of Luke-Jr is telling how desperate some have become. If anyone wonders how some awful crap gets passed by our governments look no further than the behaviour shown by a few here to get their "Revenge" on something they don't like.
You use the copyright tools to lock your source, and then you complain that other guys use those same tools just to protect their credit (the properly included license note). I'm not calling Luke-Jr a hero, just on this point he's damn right. It's not as if the license required you to pay 2 billion dollars to reuse the source, you just had to include the MIT license properly, is that so hard?
SolidCoin ripped off the open source Bitcoin code to make it proprietary (okay, that's allowed by the MIT license but that's still ugly).
Yes. I tried to pass off other peoples work as my own. I then imposed my own licensing terms on code which I did not own the rights to. All I had to do was notify people that the code I used was written by someone else and that my right to use it stemmed from the MIT license. But I failed at this trivial task, and that is why I github took down my code.
There. That wasn't so hard.
But this DMCA takedown is beyond stupid...
Hypothetical. Microsoft takes Bitcoin code, uses it, makes it closed source and removes the license. It then runs it on the entire xbox network to attack Bitcoin. You say "don't use DMCA let Bitcoin die"?
King RealScam obligation to be compliant was TRIVIAL and he willfully violated it. Not sure if you are aware but if you don't defend copyrighted material you can lose copyright protection. The courts can rule it has passed defacto into public domain. It is the responsibility of copyright holders to protect their property.
Given King RealScam was willfully noncompliant what should have been done?
Seriously guys, WHY, Do you think a DMCA is "stupid" Fuck sakes it's asif you hear DMCA and go "OH NO ALL MY PIRATED STUFF IS GONNA GET REMOVED!!!, I MUST STOP ALL FORMS OF DMCA!!"
I see this the best DMCA i have ever seen, With the second best, Being the removal of videogame ROMS
Look at it this way, a Ripoff Cyrptocurrency was taken down, Thats like spotting a Counterfeit Bill(Reffing a SC as a counterfiet BTC, I understand that it's "different") and saying "yo dudes check out this counterfiet money!, Do i take it to the bank and tell them about it? Or do i just go try to spend it anywhere i can?"
So Someone went to the "bank" with the "counterfiet money" and had it "taken out" of thier hands.
Bank->internet exchange .|. CFmoney->SolidCoins .|. Taken out->DMCA
But this DMCA takedown is beyond stupid...
Hypothetical. Microsoft takes Bitcoin code, uses it, makes it closed source and removes the license. It then runs it on the entire xbox network to attack Bitcoin. You say "don't use DMCA let Bitcoin die"?
King RealScam obligation to be compliant was TRIVIAL and he willfully violated it. Not sure if you are aware but if you don't defend copyrighted material you can lose copyright protection. The courts can rule it has passed defacto into public domain. It is the responsibility of copyright holders to protect their property.
Given King RealScam was willfully noncompliant what should have been done?
There was nothing fake about your copyright infringement. Infringement you were made aware of the day you released the source code.
You pirated software. Period. You might consider removing copyright and license notification trivial but it isn't. Had you not pirated software your github wouldn't have been taken down. Take some personal responsibility for your actions.
I really like you, and you have educated me at many points in the past.You pirated software. Period. You might consider removing copyright and license notification trivial but it isn't. Had you not pirated software your github wouldn't have been taken down. Take some personal responsibility for your actions.
But this DMCA takedown is beyond stupid...
SolidCoin ripped off the open source Bitcoin code to make it proprietary (okay, that's allowed by the MIT license but that's still ugly).
Heh that's pretty funny . You say "SolidCoin ripped off Bitcoin" then immediately follow with "Ok the license allows what SolidCoin did but it's still ripping it off! Guys! Come on...."
Many people took this stand against SOPA yet they make a hero of a guy who :-
1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins
2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources.
3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like.
4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins
Well, with those sorts of morals I'm not sure what else to expect from some here. Flip... flop. Can't have it both ways you heroes. It doesn't even matter if you don't like SolidCoin, to step down to the filthy level of Luke-Jr is telling how desperate some have become. If anyone wonders how some awful crap gets passed by our governments look no further than the behaviour shown by a few here to get their "Revenge" on something they don't like.
Most people actually found it repulsive, so I don't know where exactly you are getting that from.
Bitcoin is about absolute freedom (mostly in regards to data), which is why it boggles my mind that someone who preaches freedom of all data, would go ahead and do a DMCA takedown on an infant open source e-currency...
Ban Coinhunter, ban Solidcoin, hell ban anyone who utters the name. I personally wouldn't agree with it, as I have absolutely fallen in love with this forum over the past 6 months, simply because of it's free and truly unregulated nature. It was hard to get used to such an environment when I first got here, but it has allowed me to express myself in ways I was never able to in past.
That's why I am so against this action... DMCA takedown? Really?
There was nothing fake about your copyright infringement. Infringement you were made aware of the day you released the source code.
You pirated software. Period. You might consider removing copyright and license notification trivial but it isn't. Had you not pirated software your github wouldn't have been taken down. Take some personal responsibility for your actions.
You pirated software. Period. You might consider removing copyright and license notification trivial but it isn't. Had you not pirated software your github wouldn't have been taken down. Take some personal responsibility for your actions.
SolidCoin ripped off the open source Bitcoin code to make it proprietary (okay, that's allowed by the MIT license but that's still ugly).
Heh that's pretty funny . You say "SolidCoin ripped off Bitcoin" then immediately follow with "Ok the license allows what SolidCoin did but it's still ripping it off! Guys! Come on...."
Many people took this stand against SOPA yet they make a hero of a guy who :-
1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins
2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources.
3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like.
4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins
Well, with those sorts of morals I'm not sure what else to expect from some here. Flip... flop. Can't have it both ways you heroes. It doesn't even matter if you don't like SolidCoin, to step down to the filthy level of Luke-Jr is telling how desperate some have become. If anyone wonders how some awful crap gets passed by our governments look no further than the behaviour shown by a few here to get their "Revenge" on something they don't like.
Again I am not defending Solidcoin (obviously) or any of it's supporters.
What I am saying is that this DMCA take down is LAME AS SHIT, and goes against literally EVERYTHING we preach in these forums...
SolidCoin ripped off the open source Bitcoin code to make it proprietary (okay, that's allowed by the MIT license but that's still ugly). I think it was already said somewhere earlier in this thread, but it's a clear case of "live by the sword die by the sword" there... What I am saying is that this DMCA take down is LAME AS SHIT, and goes against literally EVERYTHING we preach in these forums...
Even though I have personal issues with the current Solidcoin developers,
I still think this is lame as shit... And probably goes against everything this community stands and preaches for.
Why is it always the Christians who are always out to seek "revenge"?
I mean that with all seriousness...
I still think this is lame as shit... And probably goes against everything this community stands and preaches for.
Why is it always the Christians who are always out to seek "revenge"?
I mean that with all seriousness...
No way, man. Don't you see?
Yes, I filed the DMCA takedown. If you have a problem with that, that's your problem for supporting plagerism and copyright infringement.
Again I am not defending Solidcoin (obviously) or any of it's supporters.
What I am saying is that this DMCA take down is LAME AS SHIT, and goes against literally EVERYTHING we preach in these forums...
Even though I have personal issues with the current Solidcoin developers,
I still think this is lame as shit... And probably goes against everything this community stands and preaches for.
Why is it always the Christians who are always out to seek "revenge"?
I mean that with all seriousness...
I still think this is lame as shit... And probably goes against everything this community stands and preaches for.
Why is it always the Christians who are always out to seek "revenge"?
I mean that with all seriousness...
No way, man. Don't you see?
Yes, I filed the DMCA takedown. If you have a problem with that, that's your problem for supporting plagerism and copyright infringement.
Even though I have personal issues with the current Solidcoin developers,
I still think this is lame as shit... And probably goes against everything this community stands and preaches for.
Why is it always the Christians who are always out to seek "revenge"?
I mean that with all seriousness...
I still think this is lame as shit... And probably goes against everything this community stands and preaches for.
Why is it always the Christians who are always out to seek "revenge"?
I mean that with all seriousness...
Still pretty lame and the DMCA is a draconian tool, which is constantly abused, like in this case.
No, this case is clearly proper use of the DMCA for good. Unfortunately, solidcoin.info was moved outside the DMCA jurisdiction, so I need to figure out German law to resume. 
Still pretty lame and the DMCA is a draconian tool, which is constantly abused, like in this case.
It's the first time I ever heard about an open-source developer making use of DMCA. I don't really like the idea of DMCA at all, but now it pwnd SC and made me laugh.
This video is related: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsLuIipny88
This video is related: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsLuIipny88
The MPAA beat Solidcoin by well over four years for this dishonour. The MPAA was on the receiving end of a DMCA take down over pirated Free Libre Open Source Software back in 2007. http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2007/12/mpaas-university-toolkit-hit-with-dmca-takedown-notice-after-gpl-violation.ars.
Saying Bitcoin should operate without any "help" from govt is naive.
So when someone breaks into your house and beats your face in with a hammer until you give them the password to your wallet and walks away with your life savings you aren't going to call the Police? There are many ways to get justice other than calling the Police.
If corporations decide they will engage in a massive DDOS attack against the blockchain in order to promote their corporate control version you want any law enforcement to look the other way? There are many ways to end the attack other than law enforcement.
Stupid. Beyond stupid. The reality is Bitcoin exists in a world of laws. Laws will certainly be used AGAINST Bitcoin regardless of what users, developers, and service providers do. So to then tie the hands of users, developers, and service providers to not use law to PROTECT Bitcoin makes no sense.
What other legal protects should "all true Bitcoin users" restrict themselves from. Should businesses not file trademark registrations, should we not seek take downs of scam sites, should an individual who comes up with a unique method to advance Bitcoin commerce not file a patent?
So when someone breaks into your house and beats your face in with a hammer until you give them the password to your wallet and walks away with your life savings you aren't going to call the Police? There are many ways to get justice other than calling the Police.
If corporations decide they will engage in a massive DDOS attack against the blockchain in order to promote their corporate control version you want any law enforcement to look the other way? There are many ways to end the attack other than law enforcement.
Stupid. Beyond stupid. The reality is Bitcoin exists in a world of laws. Laws will certainly be used AGAINST Bitcoin regardless of what users, developers, and service providers do. So to then tie the hands of users, developers, and service providers to not use law to PROTECT Bitcoin makes no sense.
What other legal protects should "all true Bitcoin users" restrict themselves from. Should businesses not file trademark registrations, should we not seek take downs of scam sites, should an individual who comes up with a unique method to advance Bitcoin commerce not file a patent?
For me the main purpose of government is to protect each individuals' physical land from intruders and also to provide a way to easily and safely communicate with others, and to get into government protected contracts. But that's just me...
So in the case of someone trying to break into my house, yes, I may call the police.
In the case of corporations trying to DDOS the blockchain - I don't mind. This will only strengthen bitcoin. But note that I would probably not be funding these corporations in the first place. Yes you may lose a lot of "buying power", but the chances of this are very low and if you're wise you would diversify your wealth into other assets. Bitcoin is a liquid asset. It should be used for short term purchases (like cash), not for holding your life savings.
Ok, but adding terms is a whole lot less effective if he has to keep the MIT license and copyright in there. But you are correct, so all he has to do is put that text back in there.
No it isn't. Any terms he puts would apply to the modified code. He says you can't use it for any derivative work so you can't period (well not lawfully). Any restrictions would be just as effective.
This is one of the "complaints" with MIT license. It has no "copyleft" provision. Derivitives of MIT license don't need to be "Free" (as in free speech) despite the fact the derivitive wouldn't even exist if it were not for the "freedom" in the original.
Microsoft could take Bitcoin code, modify it call it MicroCoin, release it as restricted source, require users to pay $20 for a consumer license, $80 for a merchant license, and $200 for a mining license. They could sue users who don't pay for a license under software piracy laws. They could write the license than any derivative work is unlawful and becomes the property of Microsoft. When you try to release a bugfix that they keep neglecting you they could sue you for software piracy. All of that would be legit with MIT license.
Literally the only thing that needs to be done is keep the copyright and include that piece of text. Period. Nothing more.
Don't read ANYTHING beyond that. The MIT license has no other restrictions on the user.
Jump to: