Really, @purism? You copy a bunch of open-source apps and make it look like they are yours without any mention of the original apps? I think you should delete these apps immediately and publicly apologize. Or at least don't have the audacity to call yourself a "Social Purpose Corporation that does not exploit people and puts doing social good over maximizing profit ", because its obviously not true.
@ConnyDuck love to pay for a bunch of rebranded free apps and uh, the promise of more?
@foxhkron yes I saw that, also looks like an AGPL violation to me, as there is no way to tell what software it is from their frontpage
@ConnyDuck I often take GPL programs and was never aware of "The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.", to be honest. So maybe the Purisum people didn't know either and it wasn't evil intent.
Right now https://source.puri.sm/thomas.markiewicz/librem-social-android still contains the original Tusky Readme.md, so it is quite obvious, what it is. Was that the case when you last looked into the repository? On the other hand it was renamed. Hope they'll react soon! I bought Librem 5.
@ConnyDuck Couldn't that "relevant notice" just be the commits in the git repository? When GPL was first written, most people probably worked with plain text files but no version managment.
@kayb Other Tusky forks put the info on the about page. Maybe their current setup is good enough to stand in a legal dispute, Im no expert on that topic. But they are definitely deceiving users and its affront to contributors to the open source apps they are now making money with.
@ConnyDuck Hope they'll get in touch with you, comment in here or whatever! I would still think they didn't plan to be incorrect.
@kayb @ConnyDuck if e.g. they take it as a base and make tusky run in a non Android environment (as pureOS is supposed to be "a regular Linux") this will provide a new benefit to the community instead of just forking and republishing the same. But as long as they adhere to the legalese it's hard to do something officially against it.
@ConnyDuck Did they get in touch with you or something alike ?
@maximilia @nipos @ConnyDuck @mondstern @dada Das ist rein rechtlich korrekt,aber Klagen sind fuer einen open source Entwickler ohne richtige Einnahmen zu teuer und ausserdem ist es eine Arschlochaktion,mit der man auch die eigene Community veraergern kann.Deshalb hat GPL Missachtung meistens keine Folgen.Fuer Purisms Image waere es aber natuerlich schlecht,wenn raus kommt,dass die die Lizenz gebrochen haben.
@Cedara no, there is no need for trackers in the apps, but of course Google Play can track what apps you install without that
@ConnyDuck thanks for the info!
@ConnyDuck Did they even try to contact you about that? I've just read that page and if I didn't know Tusky so well I wouldn't be able to identify what app they are using. The whole page is so poorly written, it feels like no one reviewed it at least once.
@Anna no they did not.
@ConnyDuck That's so shitty of them, holy crap. That's the kind of mistake I don't expect from a company heavily involved with free software.
@Anna yeah. And it seems they have already raised at least 5000$ with it. 😖
@ConnyDuck @gaab @purism Why should anyone interested in free/libre software and a web of diversity opting for "centralized" services run by a single company instead of grabbing the "original"? (I know the answer - its just for the sake of comfort...)
To me this has a strong taste of "googling" free software together and bind the users to the services of @Purism. Till now i was not really interested in @Purism, now i'm sure i will avoid their products.
@kayb @ConnyDuck @purism I'm not sure as well, but looking at the competitive chart provided by them, it's pretty much about rebuilding "the bad big ones" with free software and to provide all the services users may need/want. It's just that @Purism claims to protect privacy and so on. But using centralized services have a few pros and cons besides that.
@guzzisti Not sure whether I get you right, but where do you see centralization? What they use is Matrix (Librem Chat), Mastodon (Librem Social) with the Tusky fork mentioned here and Mail which are all federated services. Just with dedicated apps to use those, which is the situation with anything you want to use on a computer except Web Browsing.
@kayb I see centralization in @purism running all of this services at once. I can't find a benefit for "free software" in @purism establishing additional instances of services (federated or not, ) instead of encouraging the users to choose the services (free or not) they like or need. Whats the reason in binding users to the services of a single company? I thought we all had experienced what this approach leds to (remember google and facebook?) and then choosen to go our own way.
@guzzisti It matters a lot whether those services are federated or not. As long as I don't depend on their services, I don't care at all and rather welcome them offering some free service. Especially since I expect the people who funded the Librem 5 to be well aware of possible implications when using services by a certain party (though I don't see any negative aspects, only the possibility they could, in theory, occur in the future, like advertising on a Mastodon instance or so).
Truth is that the apps are all free/open. They operate their own instances of both mastodon (social.librem.one) and Riot, with their own clients.
They do not charge you for the apps, their crowdfunding campaign is for other upcoming products like encrypted email (there's NEVER enough of these) and encrypted file storage, as well as a FREE VPN tunnel.
@ConnyDuck @purism the laptops are fine, the phone is fine, but the services thing? Genuinely can't see any reason at all to even go near them. There are free alternatives that run on exactly the same privacy-respecting bases (hey look we're all already using at least one of them). They're just asking for money with flashy slogans - it's a bit pathetic honestly. Some shit is in need of a little sorting out.
@Moepmoep @ams @ConnyDuck @purism I meant as in yeah they federate, but they're grouping their own stuff together into a central place, presumably with the idea that people will buy into it and then basically be hosting their lives on these central services just like they might with Apple or Google or whomever. The difference being this is FOSS and you have access to the other federated instances of everything.
It's an unwalled garden, but still a garden.
chaos.social – a Fediverse instance for & by the Chaos community