Solidcoin DMCA takedown - page 6. | Bitcointalksearch.org

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: Luke-Jr on January 10, 2012, 05:51:05 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

sorry for OT but did this ---v really happen? I only heard about the 'random' text in block headers.

Quote from: Gabi on January 10, 2012, 03:55:46 PM

Speaking about law, how "lawful" is using the hashing power of your pool to perform an attack? Without informing the users mining there?

It's slander, nothing more.

No, this is still Libel. Pickup a fucking dictionary,
Slander is what many of us will be doing, when calling up your Church and Bible thumping buddies to inform them of your (QUOTED) views on the Pope and Catholicism.

simonk83

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Good riddance. Shame it wasn't done months ago.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: drakahn on January 10, 2012, 05:57:58 PM

I'm saying the DMCA should be the last resort, and it may have been, i was just asking if they got any notice of the infringement, maybe one person did it and all involved are being punished...

The author has been notified multiple times by multiple parties on multiple forums. To paraphrase his attitude; "I don't give a fuck."provide the copyright.

You don't accidentally violate the MIT license license. You don't accidentally remove someone elses copyright and then copyright something you didn't create.

Likewise solid coin is in violation of the berkeley db license and the attitude is simply that Oracle won't ever care enough to come after a project like SolidCoin. The reality is it may not given how pathetically small and crippled the project is. That doesn't change the fact that the author has engaged in willful piracy of copyrighted material.

When the person in question is willfully non-compliance what action should be taken? "Pretty please"? Honest question what should happen in a case of WILLFUL non-compliance.

Nachtwind

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 507

Quote from: drakahn on January 10, 2012, 05:57:58 PM

I'm saying the DMCA should be the last resort, and it may have been, i was just asking if they got any notice of the infringement, maybe one person did it and all involved are being punished...

Depends.. RealSolid had all the time in the world to undo his "mistakingly removing of copyright notices" and everything would have been settled.
Also its not exactly easy to violate MIT licence... someone really has to do an effort to violate it. Also besides not readding the copyrights he claimed often enough authorship of said code hence claiming himself owner of all rights which is copyright infringement...

Also, i was told by a close supporter of him in BTC-E chat, that RS already knew for a while that this takedown would come and didnt do anything to prevent it.. so, well deserved. DMCA takedown might be a bit much, but then again, better than a lawsuit from oracle i'd say...

drakahn

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

I'm saying the DMCA should be the last resort, and it may have been, i was just asking if they got any notice of the infringement, maybe one person did it and all involved are being punished...

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: drakahn on January 10, 2012, 05:44:15 PM

He was bragging about it and its covered here : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/pool-ops-are-now-the-alt-currency-police-56791

edit - also did solidcoin get any notice of the dmca notice? was the license requested to be put back in? i know ignorance is no excuse for the law and i am certainly not standing up for solidcoin but i dislike luke, and i think the DMCA is a PoS, this could have been dealt with better i think.

How should theft of copyrighted material be dealt with. Especially given the generous terms it is licensed under. There is pretty much no "looser" licensing than MIT license. Failure to comply was intentional.

If it were me I would have done a takedown notice against the website also not just the github. The website exists to facilitate the theft of copyrighted material.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: ?? on ??

sorry for OT but did this ---v really happen? I only heard about the 'random' text in block headers.

Quote from: Gabi on January 10, 2012, 03:55:46 PM

Speaking about law, how "lawful" is using the hashing power of your pool to perform an attack? Without informing the users mining there?

It's slander, nothing more.

drakahn

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

He was bragging about it and its covered here : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/pool-ops-are-now-the-alt-currency-police-56791

edit - also did solidcoin get any notice of the dmca notice? was the license requested to be put back in? i know ignorance is no excuse for the law and i am certainly not standing up for solidcoin but i dislike luke, and i think the DMCA is a PoS, this could have been dealt with better i think.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: Ahimoth on January 10, 2012, 05:32:19 PM

Quote from: jothan on January 10, 2012, 05:29:57 PM

He had it coming. It came.

Now I'm just waiting for the Oracle lawsuit for BDB copyright infringement. One of the only things Oracle is good for nowadays is annoying people with lawsuits.

I thought the BDB issue was that the solidcoin source was unavailable? It was on github, and its still on solidcoin.info as a download.

And released under a proprietary license which restricts the usage of said software and prohibits derivative works unless approved by the author.

Open source =/= source code available. If it did then windows is "open source".

Ahimoth

sr. member

Activity: 812

Merit: 250

Quote from: jothan on January 10, 2012, 05:29:57 PM

He had it coming. It came.

Now I'm just waiting for the Oracle lawsuit for BDB copyright infringement. One of the only things Oracle is good for nowadays is annoying people with lawsuits.

I thought the BDB issue was that the solidcoin source was unavailable? It was on github, and its still on solidcoin.info as a download.

jothan

full member

Activity: 184

Merit: 100

Feel the coffee, be the coffee.

He had it coming. It came.

Now I'm just waiting for the Oracle lawsuit for BDB copyright infringement. One of the only things Oracle is good for nowadays is annoying people with lawsuits.

jake262144

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

I'm late on the subject but oh my, this almost too rich XD

If only the ~~gestapo~~ trusted nodes could get the same special treatment...
What boggles my mind is, there apparently still are people mining ScamCoin.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 10, 2012, 03:29:13 PM

Of course reverse engineering the solidcoin "bits" would be a violation of his closed source license.

Reverse engineering is a fair use right under US law. As is interoperability (including overriding trademark law).

Gabi

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1008

If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat

Scamcoin is so much fail, i totally agree.

Speaking about law, how "lawful" is using the hashing power of your pool to perform an attack? Without informing the users mining there?

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: k9quaint on January 10, 2012, 03:27:13 PM

I think it is less about credit, and more about control. With full copyright control and via the Solidcoin license.txt, Coinhunter can revoke the right for anyone to use Solidcoin if he feels they are negatively impacting Solidcoin. If most of the source files had the MIT license as required, he would only control a small amount of code comprising the Solidcoin client. An enterprising fellow could re-implement the bits of code that turn Bitcoin into Solidcoin, and then there would be a Solidcoin client which Coinhunter did not control via license.

Someone could do that now. Of course reverse engineering the solidcoin "bits" would be a violation of his closed source license. MIT license doesn't prohibit proprietary implementations of derivative works.

k9quaint

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

I think it is less about credit, and more about control. With full copyright control and via the Solidcoin license.txt, Coinhunter can revoke the right for anyone to use Solidcoin if he feels they are negatively impacting Solidcoin. If most of the source files had the MIT license as required, he would only control a small amount of code comprising the Solidcoin client. An enterprising fellow could re-implement the bits of code that turn Bitcoin into Solidcoin, and then there would be a Solidcoin client which Coinhunter did not control via license.

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: Luke-Jr on January 10, 2012, 01:32:28 PM

Yes, I filed the DMCA takedown. If you have a problem with that, that's your problem for supporting plagerism and copyright infringement. The MIT license is not very hard to comply with. It has a single requirement: maintain the copyright line(s) and license text as-is. It is impossible to "accidentally" violate as RealSolid is supposedly claiming.

No MINE FÜHRER......no problem.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: coblee on January 10, 2012, 01:59:28 PM

CoinHunter/RealSolid had to purposely remove those copyright notices. He actually put work into removing those lines of text to violate the license. Why would anyone do that? What an idiot.

He wants to pretend that SolidCoin is a unique creation. Remember it is "ready for the bitcoin collapse". Kinda hard to sell that when it is 99% copied Bitcoin code.

TL/DR version he has a huge ego and he could never accept giving credit to anyone else. He has been notified of this multiple times on this forum and on the ScamCoin forum so any claim of "accident" is dubious. Kinda like accidentaly not realizing your are driving drunk .... for 9 months ... after getting pulled over multiple times.

coblee

donator

Activity: 1654

Merit: 1351

Creator of Litecoin. Cryptocurrency enthusiast.

CoinHunter/RealSolid had to purposely remove those copyright notices. He actually put work into removing those lines of text to violate the license. Why would anyone do that? What an idiot.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Yes, I filed the DMCA takedown. If you have a problem with that, that's your problem for supporting plagerism and copyright infringement. The MIT license is not very hard to comply with. It has a single requirement: maintain the copyright line(s) and license text as-is. It is impossible to "accidentally" violate as RealSolid is supposedly claiming.

Topic: Solidcoin DMCA takedown - page 6. (Read 10236 times)