[spongepoc]

It's hard to see where anyone is being 'taken advantage' of here. If you put your code on github with an open license, you are letting people to have their way with it. This is like if Tim Berners Lee were mad that Google 'stole' his internet and made a lot of money off it.

Also the DCGAN architecture is from Chintala et al, and that itself is based on work by Goodfellow et al. Where does this end? Does Robbie Barrat 'own' the DCGAN NN architecture now?

[nl]

I think the "taken advantage of" thing is more about the crappy way they behaved on the Github issues ("really disappointing") etc than the idea of using his code.

[sitkack]

Of the whole thing, this is what struck me as distasteful. Manipulative and degrading.

The French kids owe the Stanford kid like half to all of it.

[dgut]

The French "kids" are 25y afaik.

[tedeh]

Average peoples sense of entitlement when it comes to exploiting others freely given work probably comes as no surprise to anyone who has ever put anything open source up on Github or anywhere else.

[ReverseCold]

> If you put your code on github with an open license, you are letting people to have their way with it.

And enough people don't understand this for it to be a problem.

Edit: Removed bad phrasing.

[dragonwriter]

> In fact, making your code free for everyone to use probably is hurting the web,

It's the main reason there is a widely used public web rather than it, if it succeeded at all, being another academic niche tool alongside gopher.

[ReverseCold]

Well, assuming that's true, it has little-to-no impact on how things should be going forward. The web is very clearly here to stay. At the very least people who want credit and payment for their work should not be encouraged to use OSI licenses.