ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    So Audacity needs forked

    News
    audacity open source gpl spyware
    8
    20
    1.7k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • JaredBuschJ
      JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
      last edited by

      @scottalanmiller said in So Audacity needs forked:

      Seems damn clear...

      It was not clear, it has been modified again to my understanding.
      What you posted is basic legally required bits. I actually have nothing against this.

      But this step on top of the previous commits around data collection that were brought up in march or so make this one thing too many.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • JaredBuschJ
        JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
        last edited by

        @scottalanmiller said in So Audacity needs forked:

        Was Audacity backed by an organization before?

        No it was trademarked by a single person, who sold the trademark to Muse.

        Better open source projects are backed by an open organization that keeps clear where funding comes from and keeps direct control away from the funders.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • CloudKnightC
          CloudKnight
          last edited by

          From what I'm reading the opensource community are fuming about this and forks are already starting to happen.

          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller @CloudKnight
            last edited by

            @stuartjordan said in So Audacity needs forked:

            From what I'm reading the opensource community are fuming about this and forks are already starting to happen.

            Over 50 have happened. That's Jared's point. No clear, well backed winner. Just lots of pissed people. That's exactly what Muse wants, fractioning.

            ObsolesceO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • ObsolesceO
              Obsolesce @scottalanmiller
              last edited by

              @scottalanmiller said in So Audacity needs forked:

              Over 50 have happened. That's Jared's point. No clear, well backed winner.

              Welcome to Linux.

              DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • DashrenderD
                Dashrender @Obsolesce
                last edited by

                @obsolesce said in So Audacity needs forked:

                @scottalanmiller said in So Audacity needs forked:

                Over 50 have happened. That's Jared's point. No clear, well backed winner.

                Welcome to Linux.

                Here Bloody Here!!

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • JaredBuschJ
                  JaredBusch
                  last edited by

                  Muse Group Continues Tone Deaf Handling Of Audacity

                  Our last post on the subject ended on a high note, as it seemed like the situation was on the mend. While there was still a segment of the Audacity userbase that was skeptical about remote analytics being added into a program that never needed it before, representatives from the Muse Group seemed to be listening to the feedback they were receiving. Keary assured users that plans to implement telemetry had been dropped, and that should they be reintroduced in the future, it would be done with the appropriate transparency.

                  Unfortunately, things have only gotten worse in the intervening months. Not only is telemetry back on the menu for a program that’s never needed an Internet connection since its initial release in 2000, but this time it has brought with it a troubling Privacy Policy that details who can access the collected data. Worse, Muse Group has made it clear they intend to move Audacity away from its current GPLv2 license, even if it means muscling out long-time contributors who won’t agree to the switch. The company argues this will give them more flexibility to list the software with a wider array of package repositories, a claim that’s been met with great skepticism by those well versed in open source licensing.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • JaredBuschJ
                    JaredBusch
                    last edited by

                    Things seem to be solidifying on Tenacity, but early days still.

                    https://github.com/tenacityteam/tenacity

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • JaredBuschJ
                      JaredBusch
                      last edited by

                      They have an issue discussing governance.
                      https://github.com/tenacityteam/tenacity/issues/28

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • scottalanmillerS
                        scottalanmiller
                        last edited by

                        Fingers crossed. The 4Chan crap there did them the favour of getting them a LOT of attention.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • 1 / 1
                        • First post
                          Last post