this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2025
711 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

73546 readers
3527 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9bananas@feddit.org 1 points 7 hours ago

what a ridiculous idea. that's not how anything works:

copyright applies to the intellectual property, not the exact file.

so the code itself is the copyrighted thing, not the file you download.

it doesn't matter whether you download the gpl version, you type out the gpl version by hand, or delete all new code until only gpl code is left.

all you would need to proof is that the code is identical to the gpl code. how you got to that code is completely irrelevant.

you have some fundamental misunderstandings about copyrighted material, intellectual property, and fair use.

most importantly: copyright applies to intellectual property. the idea of a thing, not the physical thing.

so in the case of this emulator, the file and where you got it from is completely irrelevant; only the content of the file, the code, has any meaning. which means any files that contain the same code are identical in the eyes of the law, regardless of how you got them.

copyright is not a contract, but a license. and a license is a manual that explains how intellectual property (the idea of a thing, not the physical thing) is allowed to be used by someone. it's not specific to an individual, which is why contracts have to be signed by both parties. so no, you don't have a contract and no obligation to adhere to the new one at all. you can choose to use the old license, as long as you don't use any of the new code.

unless you want to modify and/or distribute the new code, the license (CC-BY-NC-ND) is irrelevant for the user.

and you can modify your own private copy as much as you want, you just can't distribute it, or modify and use it in a way that is illegal in some other way. but that's about it.

and all of this applies to both US and german law.

and none of this is remotely relevant, because the gpl version is still available for download!

nothing got replaced, so the gpl license is very much still applicable to that version of the software!

"new" does not mean that the old version went anywhere; it's still around. and you can still use, modify, and distribute it under the gpl.