logoalt Hacker News

otterleytoday at 1:25 AM1 replyview on HN

It's not about the definition of ownership, either. The author of FOSS software retains ownership, unless they explicitly convey it to someone else.

It's about how software is licensed--the terms and conditions under which someone can make a copy. That's why it's called the GNU Public License, or the MIT License, and why there's a LICENSE file.

The mere act of copying does not convey ownership, and never has.


Replies

GrinningFooltoday at 1:36 AM

I think the license was the best tool available for the ideology around ownership.