The article seems to gloss that WP is made available under GPL2+. What's the point attacking Automattic for making money when they fund the core development and make it available to everyone? It's even still available to WP Engine, the lawsuit is about trademark usage, not copyright.
From the perspective of GPL distribution rights, what exactly from Automattic 'scares [your] contributors away'?
The article says you stopped contributing because you weren't getting paid and it's demotivating to see Automattic were making money and yourself not. That's certainly understandable, but it's the same as, eg, linux kernel work. Huge numbers of devs are well-paid to contribute by companies and other devs not. You do have the option to try to get a gig being paid, as well as the option to stop or continue unpaid contribution. But it's not really valid to blame either project if some can make money from it.
It's hard to square 'antitrust' with continued availability to use and ship stuff based on GPL core code, and continued right to fork and do their own development.
Trademark rights are real and separate from copyright, it's also hard to see the judge being impressed with posturing about it.
It all feels like a code of conduct situation, the project unilaterally decided they won't work with an individual any more and withdrew credentials for working together. WPE's position is Automattic just can't do that to them, perhaps doesn't have the right to cancel anyone, 'cos antitrust. I guess we will all find out.
That site has a count of sites moved off WP Engine (currently 17K) and a graph showing the total rising over time. And some JS highlighting individual sites. So it obviously is recording sites that moved off WP Engine.
It looks like they have a list of ones not moved from them too... that doesn't change the fact they are recording the ones that moved. Either list... how is it 'anticompetitive'? If they moved, they moved; if they didn't, they didn't.
Epic clapback, but you're giggling at a name not remembered spontaneously while simultaneously not spending five seconds to check if anything actually happened.
I had a thing where github for some reason no longer accepted my email was trusted for the github account. It required setting the email again and going through the validation again.
What do you think happens if it's decided (by the service provider) you or your company failed to abide by a code of conduct... your access to the services are revoked.
It seems right to say if access to what the free service does is important to you, you should take steps to make your own arrangements to ensure it can't disappear arbitrarily. And not, eg, leech off free, revocable, provision and then complain your freebie went away.
yeah it's not that black and white in practice. we make all sorts of risk calculations when building in an ecosystem. some of these things are consistency, leadership, stability, etc.
free or not, if standards were maintained a certain way for a long period of time and then suddenly changed or are not applied consistently that is called a breach of trust and people are justified in expressing their anger and disappointment.
Are you 'justified' to decide to use your granted rights to step up and do something about what's bothering you? Yes. If you have enough energy, you can fork and gather people behind your version, to the point the original folds. Of course, you'll have to have a meaningfully different strategy about withdrawl of development services, otherwise no point. It's absolutely open to you to walk that walk.
Are you 'justified' in complaining you are no longer getting free services from a project you leeched? No. It's not even useful to you to do so.
Looks like a lot of work, basically it's the unsupported bsp pieces on all the different physical platforms, on Ubuntu.
This is a very thankless task if the board vendors (who will have access to Rockchip support) won't help either.
When there are a lot of different platforms, it's very easy to get your energy drained simply by an endless parade of small things, without getting to the point of completely solving anything. And there is no payoff since the vendors and rockchip lock up any profit.
From the perspective of GPL distribution rights, what exactly from Automattic 'scares [your] contributors away'?
The article says you stopped contributing because you weren't getting paid and it's demotivating to see Automattic were making money and yourself not. That's certainly understandable, but it's the same as, eg, linux kernel work. Huge numbers of devs are well-paid to contribute by companies and other devs not. You do have the option to try to get a gig being paid, as well as the option to stop or continue unpaid contribution. But it's not really valid to blame either project if some can make money from it.
reply