- Someone at their company needs to do a deep-dive into the code and verify that there aren't licensed third-party libraries and possibly remove them. Even companies that genuinely want to open source software that they've acquired may spend a year doing this sort of due diligence.
Well, or they could release a patch that simply nerfs the license check on the binary. No risk in terms of lost profits, for software they no longer sell.
That assumes the (a) the source is still available (b) the build environment is still available and working, (c) a staff member is still available that understands the system and/or (d) the time to figure it out and rebuild, test, and create the binary diff/patch ....
Well, yeah. The point was that there are changes that could be made, without having to make it possible for everyone else to build, that would enable continued binary support.
> Might be illegal to break someone else's proprietary software, no matter how abandoned it is.
Oh no!
Anyway
Snark aside, what you do locally on your own PC in your own home is kinda nobody else’s business, especially when you aren’t cracking it to share it with others. Pretty sure all the arguments were already hashed out in the ‘80s when VCR companies tried to block recording television to cassette tapes.
- It's risk for them with basically no upside.
- Someone at their company needs to do a deep-dive into the code and verify that there aren't licensed third-party libraries and possibly remove them. Even companies that genuinely want to open source software that they've acquired may spend a year doing this sort of due diligence.