News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Winamp Legacy player source code. Parent comment

Re:Winamp Legacy player source code by elashri on Tuesday September 24, 2024 @11:11AM (#41637385)
It is interesting that in a hypothetical scenario if someone did fork it and then thes goes to court. Which licence would take precedence here?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Winamp Legacy player source code by shiandow on Tuesday September 24, 2024 @11:25AM (#41637540)
Seems to me that it's up to you which license you use, so if one grants the right to fork then there's nothing Winamp could do to prevent that.

At best they could invalidate the one license they control, but even that seems iffy

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Winamp Legacy player source code by otteromkram on Tuesday September 24, 2024 @01:48PM (#41639092)
> Which licence would take precedence here?

Whichever one runs up the attorney's bill the highest.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Winamp Legacy player source code by favorited on Tuesday September 24, 2024 @03:13PM (#41639884)
> Which licence would take precedence here?

There is only 1 license, and it is issued by the WinAmp copyright holders. No additional license is created by hosting a repository on GitHub. The only (extremely theoretical) issue would be between GitHub and the WinAmp folks, if GH believed that WinAmp is violating its TOS.

[ Parent | on HN ]