@meldrian @GambaJo Ich dachte, du warst es, der eine US-Tötungsmission in Russland als „easy peasy“ bezeichnet hat?

Obama hatte einst gesagt, er werde Snowden keine Kampfjets hinterherjagen, und Trump hatte sogar dessen Begnadigung erwogen. Als deren Nachfolger eine 180-Grad-Wende zu machen, wäre für Biden innenpolitisch also unklug (er ist doch geschwächt, das könnte er sich nicht leisten).

Viel wichtiger aber: Jede US-Operation in Russland wäre aktuell ein verheerender Boomerang, denn sie könnte vom Kreml propagandistisch eingesetzt werden, um das diplomatische Verhältnis zwischen Europa und den USA massiv zu schwächen. Insbesondere Zögerer wie Scholz könnten das zum Anlass nehmen, z.B. bez. Ukraine die Kooperation mit den USA einzuschränken, zumal hier sicher viele eine solche Geheimdienstoperation verurteilen würden.

Sorry, aber wollte deine Behauptungen nicht so stehen lassen. Schade, dass du Diskussion nicht zulässt, sondern lieber blockst.

Today's weather forecast: expect heavy 🌧️

In the Auto Tab Opener to v2.9, translator-in-chief @mondstern single-handedly added 22 new translations!

:firefox: Download from
:gitea: Source code hosted on

Many, many thanks to him for his continuous efforts in making available to as many users as possible! ❤️

Additional languages featured in the new :

🇿🇦 Afrikaans
🇵🇪 Aymará
🇲🇱 Bambara
🇵🇭 Cebuano
🇨🇿 Czech
🇵🇭 Filipino
🇫🇷 French
🇳🇱 Frisian
🇪🇸 Galician
🇲🇰 Macedonian
🇲🇬 Malagasy
🇲🇾 Malay
🇲🇹 Maltese
🇲🇳 Mongolian
🇹🇿 Swahili
🇵🇭 Tagalog
🌐 Tatar
🇬🇭 Twi
🇺🇿 Uzbek
🇿🇦 Xhosa
🇳🇪 Yoruba
🇿🇦 Zulu

is a that allows you to open multiple URLs at once and store them locally in your .

If you want to study the source code of the Protection – I have copied it from and uploaded it to , as it's -licensed.

🔗 codeberg.org/pixelcode/Startpa

@SapphireDrew @pixelcode @Tutanota Nowhere did and in no way do I approve of this meme. Stop your false accusations.

is a 🇩🇪 non-profit hosting service that is based on @gitea and home to countless projects.

Sign up for free to or visit join.codeberg.org to become an active or supporting member! 😉

Show thread

It is my pleasure to announce that I am officially an active member of @codeberg e.V. now!

@Suiseiseki

“Why do you keep trying to tell me about your nonfree license?”

I'm just replying to your criticism.

sh.ht only says “It works”. Codeberg's ToS don't grant Codeberg any usage rights in the first place (which I'd consider a huge risk for Codeberg).

“I don't care about common interpretation - I care what it actually says”

That's not how legal interpretation works, there are tons of literature on that.

Here are a few (German-only, sorry) articles that all agree that trivial software works aren't copyright-protected:

prigge-recht.de/urheberrecht-a
studlib.de/7519/recht/software
kanzlei-lachenmann.de/software
digital-recht.at/wann-ist-eine (note: Austrian law is very similar to German law)

@Suiseiseki “I'm talking about USA copyright”

Why then are you commenting on a blog article that deals with European law and uses German law as an example? (Also, FYI, the For Good Eyes Only Licence enforces the GDPR regardless of the licensee's jurisdiction.)

“use literally any git host without nonfree terms”

Can you name a few?

Yes, that's the one I meant. Though, the devil is in the details, particularly in the phrase “[... ] if they represent individual works in the sense that they are the result of the author’s own intellectual creation”. The terms “individual work” and “intellectual creation” both refer to the level of artistic creation necessary for copyright protection. And that level just isn't reached by short excerpts, according to common interpretation.

@Suiseiseki “yes you can be [punished], as copyright infringement is always a crime”

§ 15 StGB clearly says: “Unless the law expressly provides for criminal liability for negligent conduct, only intentional conduct attracts criminal liability.” And § 106 UrhG doesn't say anything about negligent conduct.

If you're saying that prohibiting the use of one's creations for the purpose of harming others is “tyrannical”, then, by your own logic, you must be a war crimes advocate.

Just like free speech doesn't mean you can say literally anything, software freedom shouldn't mean that you can use the software for literally any purpose – but only for those purposes that aren't destructive for society.

Have you heard of the paradox of tolerance (rhetorical question)?

@Suiseiseki “Yes, trivial code fragments are copyrightable”

That's plainly false. I'd suggest re-reading § 69a UrhG.

Regarding the ad-blocking stuff you're completely right. Your arguments are similar to the Hamburg regional court's argumentation why ad-blockers don't constitute copyright infringement.

@Suiseiseki
Almost every single content hosting platform has got ToS that allow them to use the content in ways that violate standard copyleft provisions. That's not unique to GitHub, but is also the case for GitLab and Gitea (servers). Therefore, if one is not a lawyer, the only way to make sure you don't commit a copyright infringement by re-distributing a copyleft work is not uploading derivative works to third-party services, but only to that service used by the original work. That is a de-facto vendor lock-in. It would be possible to host the code oneself on one's own server, but that's not an actual option for most developers.

@Suiseiseki By definition, licences grant rights, therefore they can't reserve all rights (that's the default due to copyright law), which is exactly what “proprietary” means. “Proprietary” is not a synonym for “not OSD-compliant”.

Almost everyone who violates the GDPR is not something like a human rights violator or war criminal etc. For example, the German national railway company is currently being sued for violating the GDPR by including mandatory trackers in their app. According to the For Good Eyes Only Licence, that would also be a copyright infringement (if the app was a derivative work).

@Suiseiseki

“As long as the license has been complied with, any users can just strip garbage out”

Well, not only garbage, but dangerous garbage, that's the problem. I just don't want to allow anyone to misuse my creations for the purpose of harming others.

@Suiseiseki I'm not talking about re-arrangements of the work, but of its characters. What I was referring to is that most of Copilot's outputs have nothing in common with the analysed code, other than the syntax of the programming language used.

There is no universal minimum length for copyright protection; it's always case-dependent and usually very complex. I mean, there could be two works of the same length; one of them might condense significant artistic value into minimal volume, while the other one is nothing but a bloat of uncreative, generic commands.

If you don't know you're infringing upon someone else's copyright, you aren't punished – but that doesn't make the copyright infringement itself legal.

Compilers: Hm, that's not exactly what I meant. I was more referring to the fact that compilers always produce “expected” outputs, or in other words: the same output for the same input.

@Suiseiseki The argument of copyright organisations is that ad-blockers modify websites in whole (not the JavaScript), by removing the ads from the display visible to the user.

@Suiseiseki If you knew what the term “proprietary” means, you'd understand that something like “proprietary licences” doesn't exist: forgoodeyesonly.codeberg.page/

The main purpose of the For Good Eyes Only Licence is banning privacy invasions, for example by including third-party trackers in the derivative work. It doesn't make sense to ban something (in this context) as “trivial” as GDPR violations but on the other hand not to care about something much worse like human rights infringements.

Copyleft prevents licensees from uploading derivative works to third-party services whose ToS aren't copyleft-compliant, which is basically a form of vendor lock-in.

If you think stricter copyright law would “strengthen copyleft”, you must be a troll. It would mean that trivial code fragments, like said implementation of the Fibonacci sequence, would be copyright-protected, so that it would be much more easy to unknowingly commit IP infringements. Read this for reference: felixreda.eu/2021/07/github-co

@Suiseiseki The SFC's lawyers absolutely do know “a hell of a lot” more than me, but that doesn't change anything about the legal situation, you know? Funny how, for some reason, you seem to think that a billion-dollar company has not made sure not to risk tons of lawsuits.

Also, you might be interested in this paper by John A. Rothchild, Professor of Law, Wayne State University, and Daniel H. Rothchild, PhD candidate, University of California, who argue that “Copilot and its developer-customers likely do not infringe developers’ copyrights”: fsf.org/licensing/copilot/copy

There are regularly instances of F-Droid apps (even the F-Droid store itself) being sold on Google Play by third parties, sometimes even including ads and trackers. You might find that a great example of software freedom but I don't.

@Suiseiseki Compilers only translate the source code into machine code without changing anything about the funcionality, and they're so simple they're merely a tool of the programmer.

Well, “intellectual property” might be an oxymoron, but that doesn't change the fact that it's core to copyright law.

Author right's don't need to be overridden, GitHub just needs sufficient usage rights, which are in fact granted by the ToS.

Yes, uploading copyleft works to a third-party service, whose ToS aren't copyleft-compliant, is most likely a copyright infringement by the uploader.

@Suiseiseki I don't “support” GitHub, I advocate against using it. The article simply explains why Copilot isn't illegal. Please understand the difference.

Call what Copilot does whatever you want; re-arranging the characters of a copyright-protected work doesn't constitute a copyright infringement whatsoever.

Those few excerpts that are copied verbatim are not copyright-protectable because they are too short for that (in 99% less than 150 chars). And yes, size isn't the only factor for copyright protection – even longer excerpts might be not protectable.

Verbatim copying is not magically impossible just because one has “learnt” from code. Take the Fibonacci sequence for example: scribe.citizen4.eu/developers- There just aren't that many different ways of implementing it. There are tons of similar situations where even a human would repeat “someone else's” code, knowingly or unknowingly.

Show older