Post AhoFTUfhxwVGsXH1Rg by chriscochrun@mastodon.online
 (DIR) More posts by chriscochrun@mastodon.online
 (DIR) Post #AhnKoxAHWt5BwUfMw4 by phnt@fluffytail.org
       2024-05-11T21:57:13.830823Z
       
       0 likes, 2 repeats
       
       Interested if fedi users use FUTO's Grayjay app for viewing videos on Youtube/alternatives and if they consider it as an open-source application (see reply under this post).Mobile only poll.Tag spam for searchability:#FUTO #Youtube #Grayjay #FOSS
       
 (DIR) Post #AhnKst40if2yNhbo2K by phnt@fluffytail.org
       2024-05-11T21:57:59.051502Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Do you consider Grayjay as open-source software?
       
 (DIR) Post #AhnMOzaK6pM3pLazMe by adiz@soc0.outrnat.nl
       2024-05-11T22:13:48.588Z
       
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @phnt@fluffytail.org Have never heard of Grayjay. I use NewPipe personally because that's what I know.
       
 (DIR) Post #AhnO66xMg34b61UuZ6 by phnt@fluffytail.org
       2024-05-11T22:33:57.170581Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @adiz It's an Android client for Youtube and other alternatives developed by FUTO (created by a WhatsApp founder and marketed to the public mainly by Louis Rossmann). It has a somewhat controversial license called "FUTO temporary license" (FTL) that breaks many rules for it to be considered as open-source, while Louis marketed it as an open-source app. For example any modification of the code is prohibited and you are only allowed to audit, build and clone the codebase as is (lines 17 and 26 in the license file from the gitlab repo). Basically it's a source-available license, something akin to the Unreal Engine license.https://grayjay.app/https://gitlab.futo.org/videostreaming/grayjay
       
 (DIR) Post #AhnODqUZm7FiLjihKi by adiz@soc0.outrnat.nl
       2024-05-11T22:35:22.159Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @phnt@fluffytail.org If the code is available then it's open source regardless of license, no? You "can't" modify it but that's just because the license says so, right? In actuality you could ignore the license and do whatever you want assuming the code is available.
       
 (DIR) Post #AhnSkXZFYaY71qkfGC by phnt@fluffytail.org
       2024-05-11T23:26:03.736045Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @adiz Depends on your definition of open source. The license and therefore the code shouldn't be called open source, because it violates the rules for a license to be considered as open source by the Open Source Initiative (Rules 1, 3 and 6). You can do whatever you want with the code, and Louis said it's fine unless you sell your version, however the license legally prohibits you from doing that, so you are in a grey area legally. It's very unlikely FUTO would care, but the possibility is there. The funniest thing from this is probably that the license prohibits sending patches upstream, because you are not allowed to modify the code, only creating bug reports is allowed.
       
 (DIR) Post #AhoFTUfhxwVGsXH1Rg by chriscochrun@mastodon.online
       2024-05-12T00:39:10Z
       
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @phnt I use it but I do not consider it open source. Open as viewable but not able to modify it.
       
 (DIR) Post #AhrFU9S0vttMpL3sx6 by SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
       2024-05-13T19:14:32.370Z
       
       2 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @phnt@fluffytail.org There is no "if you consider it open-source".It is simply not free software or open source by definition, this is not a matter of opinion.
       
 (DIR) Post #AhrFZLtS6DAOrgNLQO by Sarosa@coretalk.space
       2024-05-13T19:17:16.839Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Nerds, can this licence be considered free or open source?#freesoftware, #opensource, #oss, #softwarefreedom, #askfedi, #askfediverse, #legal @phnt@fluffytail.org