YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

Re:YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut d... by montecarl on Thursday July 04, 2019 @01:16AM (#20351767)

The only domain where I have seen this is with commercial scientific software that is designed to be run on supercomputers. This is mostly due to the difficulty of producing high performance binaries that work with the MPI implementation.

One interesting implication is that since people can view and modify the source code, patches and modifications to the software are shared.

This has always lead me to wonder if a diff file violates copyright as it includes some of the original source as context.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut d... by kdbg on Thursday July 04, 2019 @01:59AM (#20351937)

I'm not a lawyer but this reminds me of how game mods are shared for old games. They are shared at patch files to avoid sharing the copyrighted original binary/rom file.

My understanding is that use a patch file as long as your patch doesn't include any copyrighted material it is fair to share.

A patch file does not necessarily have any of the original code, just the location info and the new value.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut d... by baroffoos on Thursday July 04, 2019 @02:04AM (#20351960)

This is still how custom themes for the switch are distributed since the menu file is considered copyrighted they distribute a file and a tool you can use to apply the file to the menu file on your system.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut d... by anilakar on Thursday July 04, 2019 @04:03AM (#20352553)

YLLMV (Your Local Legislation May Vary), but reverse engineering and subsequent modifications are completely legal here, if they're more for compatibility than competition.

[ Parent | on HN ]