Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54539 readers

186 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

A better Revanced (grayjay.app)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

74 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Watched Louis Rossman today, and he's part of the team behind a new app for watching online video content - not just youtube, but nebula, peertube, twitch and more.

adblock already integrated, works amazingly with a quick test on my end - it's an app in the Lemmy spirit

(it's got a paid model similar to winrar, you don't have to pay - but they do want you to - opensource and all)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is not free software but it is open source. Stop gatekeeping the term. I can look at the code and modify it to my hearts content. I can also watch as the project is being developed. That means it's open source. It would be free software if you where also allowed to redistribute it but I can fully see why they do not want that

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it is open source. Stop gatekeeping the term

i guess you didn't click the link in my comment? here is another, with a list of governments and other entities who all agree about the definition: https://opensource.org/authority/

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh so what you're trying to say is that, because the license they chose is not on this list, it's not open source. Stupid take IMO but you do you

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It isn't about the list of approved licenses, it's about the criteria for being added to the list. New licenses regularly meet the definition. This license clearly does not.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

so what Edward Snowden developed a closed source license

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

oh cool, if Edward Snowden did it I guess software freedom isn't important anymore 🙄

But seriously, did he? which one? I'm not familiar with that.

But even if he did release something under one, I would be extremely surprised if he called a non-free license "open source" as FUTO is doing here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

top 10 most deserving people to be on an emkay video number 2:

edit: also i borderline didn't understand what he was saying