[xyzzy_plugh]

I don't like all this shaming on social media. It feels performative and leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

If they're in violation of your copyright agreements, sue them. If you can't sue them because it's unenforceable, well, that sucks, but too bad.

I don't know what they expect to happen here. Is there even a clear call to action? Boycott? Do something.

[kennywinker]

> Back then we considered legal action. We seriously did. But the practical reality: PrusaSlicer is software, not hardware. There's no boxed product crossing customs to stop - only real possibility which would make them comply. And jurisdiction for the licensee lands in China, which means the case lands in a Chinese court applying Chinese law to a Chinese company.

If there is no legal recourse, but you believe in the ideas and philosophy of copyleft, then all that is left is social enforcement. I.e. don’t buy their printers and tell your friends not to buy their printers.

But you seem to have a problem with that second part because it’s “performative”? Ok…

Or is it just that you’d rather the call to action was clearer? Because it’s pretty clear to me.

[xyzzy_plugh]

I understand, appreciate and respect copyleft but I'm no zealot.

Fundamentally this rubs me the same wrong way as others attempting to enforce social contracts do. It feels wrong to assume that western ethics should be universal and apply to a foreign entity such as a business in China. Perhaps they simply view this as a viable approach? And, surprise, it is, at least for them. Do I wish that weren't the case? Sure, that'd be grand. But I don't see how this post gets us any closer to that fantasy.

Put yourself in their shoes. Someone released some software under a license designed around a foreign legal framework that doesn't apply to you. You can make products using that software that people want and make money. Is it your fault you are immune from the license? Is it your government's? Is it wrong to do so? I don't think it's clear enough.

And yeah the call to action should be clear. It's not. I don't see why they can't pursue legal action and go for damages or at the very least prevent the sale of their printers in local jurisdictions. Perhaps that would still be performative but it at least creates precedence that others can use to strengthen their own cases, or allow governments to push for action. But it appears like they're doing nothing.

If the US or the EU are going to do nothing about Chinese companies pedaling wares derived from US/EU IP made possible only by dodging licensing requirements then perhaps it's simply not a viable approach to rely on copyleft to protect you. Or you can try and change that.

[BadBadJellyBean]

I think you are missing the point. Someone made the software and assigned it a license. Bambulabs decided they wanted to build their product on top of that. No one forced them. It was a business decision. So it's first and foremost a dick move to not adhere to it.

They could have created their complete custom, closed source, commercially licensed slicer. They didn't. It was probably a lot cheaper to take some else's work and slap your customizations on it.

On open source license if first and foremost the original author's decision on what can and can not, must or must not be done with their code. therefore shaming someone for ignoring the wishes is not just a last resort, but a valid strategy. Especially if it is company that wants and has money.

We wouldn't need any legal avenue when saying "don't be a dick" would work. Not respecting someone's work and wishes seems to be a pretty universal dick move from what I understand.

[xyzzy_plugh]

Believe me the point is not lost on me. But it's certainly not a universal dick move. It's an opportunity in a society that does not care for the laws on the other side of the world.

If it's such a universal dick move, then why do Chinese companies keep doing it? Do you imagine they realize they are being unethical? Perhaps your morals and ethics are less universal than you believe. Do you think that perhaps it is the case that a society that prides itself on its communist integrity might not hold fond feelings about copyright

I see businesses make this mistake again and again. I don't know why they expected a different outcome. You don't anthropomorphize a lawn mower. Shaming does nothing to improve the situation.

[kennywinker]

What you’re espousing here is just basic moral relativism. Except what you’re getting wrong is that US companies break IP law constantly. It turns out companies aren’t moral actors, they’ll do whatever. The GPL is a business opportunity here too. It’s just that in the US/canada/eu the legal side is more enforceable. Don’t give a f about the GPL in china -> successful biz. Don’t give an f about the GPL in the US -> successful biz + a chance at a lawsuit or some social blowback. That’s the only real difference - no need to evoke some deep cultural or moral difference.

> Shaming does nothing to improve the situation.

Except it does? Less bambus are being sold because of this, and more printers from manufacturers that respect the open source licenses are being sold. In fact, bambu initially locked things down hard and the social blowback made them backpedal and gave us “lan-only mode”.

[xyzzy_plugh]

Fundamentally I agree with you.

I'd love to see stats showing a material impact to their sales but I'm not optimistic. If I were to guess I'd reckon their sales are still climbing.

[BadBadJellyBean]

I have been to China, I know a lot of Chinese people and I am pretty sure that this is a dick move in China as well.

Problem is that companies don't care if they are dicks as long as the money is right.

And you call it shaming, I call it warning others. Sometimes bad publicity is actually bad for the company. Sometimes people will reconsider buying things if they find out that companies are being dicks. Not always. But sometimes.

[qwerpy]

I agree with the issue at stake but I’ve seen in practice where it can lead when people attach their morals to other people’s purchasing decisions. First, it’s “don’t buy their stuff”. Then “tell your friends not to buy their stuff”. Then it’s “shame random people who buy their stuff”. Then it’s “vandalize people’s stuff”.

I know no one’s going to go into other peoples houses to break their printers, but the whole social enforcement thing really soured me after what happened with my EVs the past year. Even when I agree with the principle I automatically hate any call to impose opinions on other people’s purchases. Most people will be responsible about it but it will inspire enough unhinged people to tarnish the cause.

[kennywinker]

So you bought a cybertruck _after_ the sig heil, and the gutting of the federal gov, and you’re somehow worried your bambu is going to draw the same level of anger?

Surely you can see the difference in stakes between those two situations? Or maybe you can’t… you bought a cybertruck lol

[embedding-shape]

I think the courts are so inefficient, not to mention limited to single countries, that huge "social protests" like this seems more efficient if you actually want to see some change, rather than the year-long process of going through the courts.

I do agree with you though, that every time these things happen I also get a somewhat sour taste in my mouth. Ideally there'd be better venues for things like this, but based on history it seems to be the most effective way, sadly.

[MattRix]

Oh please, they deserve shaming. This is a great use of social media. Put the facts out there as you see them. No need to sue or have a call to action.