Topic: What is the forum's policy on blatant software license abuse? - page 2. (Read 3988 times)

 It seems to me the point of the takedown notice was to remove posts from THIS website.  ie bitcointalk.org
Mods can do that but ckolivas is looking for confirmation of his proposal.

 If I may, however,
 Why is it that when it directly involves a moderator (however valid the argument may be) we will do something about it yet we merely get a "Caveat Emptor" post by gmaxwell in the Bitcoin Mining section.  KNOWN scam artist are allowed to hawk their wares even when they have nothing to hawk!  If it weren't for Dogie, newbies would be ripe for the pickings... hell maybe they still are!  

 I agree that what they have done is wrong and, in many jurisdictions, illegal but if we're going to talk about shutting down Bitmain for GPL V 3.0 violations, then we have to talk seriously about shutting down several others for stealing peoples money and continuing to do so even as I write.

I am opposed to all intellectual property, including copyleft licenses.

From a natural rights perspective: Intellectual property is not real property because it has no scarcity, and there is therefore no such thing as intellectual property rights. If we lived in a world without scarcity, where anything could be conjured up instantly with no cost, then the concept of property would be nonsensical because there would never be any conflict between people who wanted to use the same thing. Such a world is impossible for physical items because some things like original Gutenberg bibles or bitcoins are inherently scarce, but we already live in a post-scarcity world for information. I can copy and use any data without stopping you from using your copy of the data. So you have no right to prevent me from using my real property to duplicate and distribute any data, even if you created it, and even if the data is only protected by a copyleft license. (Unless I explicitly agreed to follow your conditions, but a notice in a file is not a contract.)

Source code licenses are especially ridiculous because you're saying that you own the result of some instructions that you've published, even though you don't even publish these results. (Source code being instructions for the compiler in producing object code.)

From a consequentialist perspective: If there was no copyright, then the producers of copyrighted content would have less incentive to produce content, but the free availability of ideas would probably inspire even more innovation and prosperity. In cgminer's case, maybe these hardware companies would have had to charge more for their hardware or been unable to create a product at all if they'd been required to publish their changes. I don't see how the world would be be improved if these companies were forced to expend resources to publish their modified cgminer code. (Would the changes even be useful for anyone else? I imagine that they're pretty hardware-specific.)

(I'm pretty bad at arguing things like this, so I doubt I convinced anyone here, but hopefully you at least understand my position.)

I recognize that it'd be ethically OK for the forum to support IP even if government-enforced IP is unethical, but I believe that fighting IP is good here for the same reasons that it's good elsewhere. Therefore, copyright violations should not be removed from the forum except where required by law. (Moderators should not deal with legal stuff, though. If posts on the forum violate cgminer-related copyright, send me a DMCA complaint and I will deal with it if necessary.)

Would Google comply with a takedown request in removing their links from search?

I'm in favor of this as well.

Bitmaintech.com resolves to 119.9.72.212 which is an APNIC IP allocated to Rackspace in Hong-Kong

Since the DMCA is US Law, I am not sure jurisdiction applies

However, their domain registrar is Godaddy and their DNS servers are hosted in Arizona which is under US jurisdiction.

I would suggest sending a takedown notice to Godaddy

If you need help in formatting a correct takedown, send me a PM and I can help.

It might be more appropriate to send formal cease and desist notices to violating hardware manufacturers, and send DCMA infringement notices (yes, you can send DCMAs for GPL violations) to Bitcointalk for the removal of the threads.

Also, send DCMA takedowns to *where* they host the cgminer binaries.

This is a legal issue (even though we all know it is clear cut) and should be handled formally.

Actually you have about 10x as much hardware as me from many different manufacturers in your reviewing efforts. I suspect you'll be able to generate that list easier than me. Create a list of what runs cgminer  (which is most hardware now) and we can take it from there. You'll probably be suitably disapointed by the lack of GPL compliance of a lot of that hardware too.

If you give me a full list of companies and their compliance, along with specifically what you need companies to do I'll see what I can do.

Fair enough, I'll join in with this - let's see where this goes.......

OK - after reading IYFTech's post I decided to join in & give the name & shame idea a try:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8397217

Any & all support would be appreciated, let's see if we can shame them into towing the line......

Now take off and nuke from orbit.

valid concerns for sure

i suspect that although i live in the us and rarely travel my reading tells me of a lot of piracy in other countries and it is just the way things are done

we can ban all the abusers , boycott them , not use thier products

in the bitcoin arms race if someone comes up with a unit that can out perform other units  there will still be people waiting in line to buy it months in advance no matter what stand is taken i fear,

hopefully i am wrong

I have experienced this with the Chinese in other products....they generally don't provide good documentation and their response to requests for information is generally, "you don't need to know that to operate the equipment"

cultural thing I guess

that said I feel they are obligated to abide by the terms of the license since they benefited from the work ckolivas did

I support a ban should they not comply

Make a poll to see what people think? I'd personally be in support of you.

There is an excellent post here concerning this very issue & highlighting ckolivas's (as well as most miners, I think) concerns:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8382331

I believe public pressure should be applied in the first instance and, if that fails, some kind of moderation warning before any ban should be considered - and even then only in extreme cases or when these manufacturers are blatantly up to no good. Public humiliation is a very powerful tool that has served the Bitcoin community here well so far on previous occasions.

Something must be done for sure 

I think this is a super idea - If you don't comply with cgminer GPL terms, don't expect to use these forums as a platform for selling your wares.

All the A1 variants are abusing it, and every single dragon type miner thing and BTC olympus and some LKETC thingy and I lost track of all the other variants coming out since they all started blatantly ignoring my requests and I didn't have the energy to pursue them.

Yes the big surprise is bitmain. They released their S1 code easily, we almost had to beg them to get the S2 code and the S3 code they have silently ignored any requests for code.

Yes I can and that's what this thread is about. If it is deemed they are violating the forum policy I would be able to request they release their source code or threaten to have their threads removed. However there is no policy on this currently and I'm quite sure users would be outraged if I took it upon myself to start deleting all the bitmain threads with a GPL takedown notice without there at least being a forum policy on it being created and some warning.

Aren't you staff? Can't you just moderate them out of existence on this forum? There are dozens of other forums they could sell on but still you would have them gone from here.

The bad thing about proving someone stole your software for a closed source version is you can't really look at the code in their version to tell even though you know it's yours.

You could conjure the ghost of RMS to haunt them..... or sue them, whatever suits you best.

Would you mind listing the others that you are aware of ? Aren't all the A1's abusing your license ? Does Bitmain publish their changes ?