Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

If the deadbeat client was using his work, he had recourse. It might take forever to chase his money down, but it's much easier to shut a site down.

By releasing the code under a permissive license, he gave up that recourse. His client's right to use the code is now a grey area. Technically, he has the same recourse in court as he did before; contracts. But he's severed the connection between that and the deployment of his code.

I'm not expressing nerdly outrage at how he did it. I'm simply suggesting a tactical refinement for the next person who decides to dump dox to Github when a client doesn't pay.




>If the deadbeat client was using his work, he had recourse.

Not in China.

-----




Applications are open for YC Winter 2016

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: