| > You're attributing unverifiable negative intentions to the Defold developers. I'm attributing motives to them based on their own admission—that they were misrepresenting their project. There's nothing unverifiable about it. They posted on HN and tweeted about it—their own words. It's not reaching on my part. (Why are you, like other commenters here, so attached to the plausible deniability angle? It's not available anymore. It's gone.) > they also have an incentive to keep the words "open source" in a sufficiently prominent position on their website to ensure that search engines list their page in the results for the search term "open source game engine" Uh...? Giving an accounting of the incentives isn't exculpatory. Thieves have an incentive to take things that aren't theirs. Liars have an incentive to tell people things that aren't true. Cheaters have an incentive to have sex with someone who isn't their partner. We already know _why_ they want to do it. That wasn't ever in dispute. > This, the last HN thread about this, and other similar negative feedback create an incentive to avoid the term "Open Source" This is as baffling of a remark as the earlier one. By "avoid the term" you mean "avoid misrepresenting the license under which they're really making the source code available". Prosecuting murder is a form of negative feedback that discourages people from carrying out murder. This is known. It's not an unfortunate consequence. It's rather the whole point. |