TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Monit's DMCA takedown notice for Inspeqtor

164 点作者 jbrowning超过 10 年前

13 条评论

LukeB_UK超过 10 年前
It looks like Mike Perham wants to bring the repo back up, but due to the DMCA request. It&#x27;ll be at least 10 days [0]. He also says that he never looked at the code for Monit [1].<p>He has also filed a counterclaim with GitHub [2]<p>[0] <a href="https://twitter.com/mperham/status/519164948887257090" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mperham&#x2F;status&#x2F;519164948887257090</a><p>[1] <a href="https://twitter.com/mperham/status/519165523473358848" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mperham&#x2F;status&#x2F;519165523473358848</a><p>[2] <a href="https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-10-06-tildeslash-counternotice.md" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;github&#x2F;dmca&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;2014-10-06-tildes...</a>
evanphx超过 10 年前
Monit is wining this discussion because their DMCA notice has caused the code not be visible, since anyone with both codebases could easily look at them and see that Inspeqtor is not a translation of the Monit code in any shape or form.<p>Because of this, I have put the code back up, please consult <a href="https://github.com/evanphx/inspeqtor" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;evanphx&#x2F;inspeqtor</a> vs <a href="http://mmonit.com/monit/dist/monit-5.9.tar.gz" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;mmonit.com&#x2F;monit&#x2F;dist&#x2F;monit-5.9.tar.gz</a>
评论 #8417123 未加载
jahewson超过 10 年前
There are some very dubious claims in their DMCA takedown notice:<p>&gt; The work, Inspeqtor which is hosted at GitHub, is far from a “clean-room” implementation. This is basically a rewrite of Monit in Go, even using the same configuration language that is used in Monit, verbatim.<p>There is no concept of &quot;clean room&quot; in copyright law, the only issue is whether or not substantial copying has occurred. While it may be easier for the author to avoid accidental copying if he has never looked at the Monit source code, having seen it, being inspired by its design, or deliberately building a compatible system do not constitute copying. The notion that it must be copying simply because it uses the same configuration language is without merit, due to the fact that the configuration language itself is not a creative work and is not eligible for copyright protection, in the same way that an API or a programming language is not eligible for such protection: it is a medium for expression, not an expression in itself - otherwise all programs written in a given programming language would be a derivative work!<p>I suspect that it is this misunderstanding that has led the authors of Monit to file this DMCA takedown, and that they have acted in good faith, but with an insufficient understanding of the limits of what copyright protects.<p>&gt; a. [private] himself admits that Inspeqtor is &quot;heavily influenced“ by Monit<p>Being heavily influenced is not the same as copying. OpenOffice Writer is heavily influenced by Microsoft Word, and can even open the same file format, but it does not copy any of Microsoft&#x27;s source code.<p>&gt; b. This tweet by [private] demonstrate intent. &quot;OSS nerds: redesign and build monit in Go. Sell it commercially. Make $$$$. I will be your first customer.”<p>The quote was &quot;redesign and build Monit in Go&quot; which does not show intent to engage in substantial copying of Monit&#x27;s source code. If anything, it suggests an intent to write a new, redesigned system with its own source code but compatibility with monit.<p>Without looking at the source code, it&#x27;s hard to say more, if the author simply ported the source code of Monit to Go then it would certainly be a derived work, but the DMCA claim doesn&#x27;t mention any such copying. It&#x27;s important to remember that <i>compatibility is not copying</i> and that only the source code to a computer program is covered by copyright - its architecture, design, and even APIs (see Oracle vs Google) are not protected by copyright, because otherwise the copyright claim would effectively behave like a patent, preventing anybody else from creating something conceptually similar.
评论 #8417583 未加载
评论 #8417573 未加载
评论 #8417413 未加载
antirez超过 10 年前
I may be wrong since IMNAL, but something is strange about this:<p>1) inspeqtor is written in Go and shares no code with Monit anyway.<p>2) The takedown claims violation of license. Licenses only apply to code, so patents and similar are out of this game.<p>1+2 don&#x27;t stay together. How is a code license violated if the code is totally different between the two projects? I believe this is something that can be easily fixed with a good lawyer.
评论 #8417026 未加载
评论 #8416962 未加载
评论 #8416936 未加载
评论 #8416956 未加载
评论 #8416950 未加载
评论 #8416909 未加载
jasim超过 10 年前
I&#x27;m a developer who does just enough server management to keep my systems running, and Monit is an invaluable part of the toolkit.<p>However, the one thing I don&#x27;t like about Monit is the pseudo natural language syntax that inspeqtor surprisingly borrowed, based on which Monit raises the DMCA claim. I wonder what the general feeling about this is in the sysadmin community, and whether people would prefer a different syntax instead.
评论 #8417650 未加载
IamThePherocity超过 10 年前
Well, I certainly will not be using Monit ever again should this be accurate. There is no illegal activity from what I can tell, so it&#x27;s entirely baseless. Are they unclear about what copyright means? Did they hire a lawyer? Does not inspire a lot of confidence.<p>edit: I&#x27;ve reached out to Monit for an explanation, and will amend if they reply.
评论 #8417000 未加载
评论 #8416951 未加载
thu超过 10 年前
This will be sorted out quickly I guess: Monit&#x27;s DMCA notice claims this is a rewrite of Monit. This tweet[0] claims the opposite. (I take &quot;rewrite&quot; as a manual translation to Go as they also say it&#x27;s not a clean-room implementation).<p>It remains to see if the part where they note the similarity with the configuration syntax can actually be covered with the AGPL.<p>[0] <a href="https://twitter.com/mperham/status/519165523473358848" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mperham&#x2F;status&#x2F;519165523473358848</a>
jxf超过 10 年前
The timing of this seems odd to me. Why now, of all times? Is Inspeqtor getting too big or stealing too many Monit customers?<p>It&#x27;s also a little strange that the tweet Monit references as being demonstrative of intent happened six months ago [0]. If that was really the issue, shouldn&#x27;t they have issued the DMCA takedown then, instead of waiting so long?<p>I think we have about 24 hours before the DMCA&#x27;s version of the Streisand effect kicks in.<p>[0]: <a href="https://twitter.com/mperham/status/452160352940064768" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mperham&#x2F;status&#x2F;452160352940064768</a>
评论 #8417321 未加载
slantedview超过 10 年前
&quot;Inspeqtor which is hosted at GitHub, is far from a “clean-room” implementation. This is basically a rewrite of Monit in Go&quot;<p>I don&#x27;t understand this. How is a re-write a license violation?
评论 #8416949 未加载
评论 #8416954 未加载
评论 #8416975 未加载
评论 #8416948 未加载
zellyn超过 10 年前
At first glance, the tweet [0] was sent a while ago, expressing <i>desire</i> for a port, with the idea of $$$$ as an incentive&#x2F;joke. It appears that the author later decided to implement it themself. I hardly think that makes his intent to commercialize it clear.<p>[0] <a href="https://twitter.com/mperham/status/452160352940064768" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mperham&#x2F;status&#x2F;452160352940064768</a>
评论 #8417291 未加载
cordite超过 10 年前
It seems Monit has issued a retraction [1]<p>[1]: <a href="https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-10-06-tildeslash-retraction.md" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;github&#x2F;dmca&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;2014-10-06-tildes...</a>
teachingaway超过 10 年前
ChillingEffects.org revamped their website a few days ago.<p>Submit your DMCA takedown notice!
anonanon101超过 10 年前
There are too many similarities between the code that suggest the source for Monit was indeed looked at, contrary to what Mike has stated on Twitter.<p>For instance some of the file names are the same, ie, Inspector&#x27;s events.go and Monit&#x27;s Event.c<p>Further, the code is very similar in places. Mind you it&#x27;s not a direct copy, but this can&#x27;t be coincidence.<p>Monit: <a href="https://bitbucket.org/tildeslash/monit/src/1686ffd4baa16b16d1eeae137e436d68e97e06e9/src/event.c?at=master#cl-88" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bitbucket.org&#x2F;tildeslash&#x2F;monit&#x2F;src&#x2F;1686ffd4baa16b16d...</a><p>Inspeqtor: <a href="https://github.com/evanphx/inspeqtor/blob/master/events.go#L19" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;evanphx&#x2F;inspeqtor&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;events.go#L...</a>
评论 #8417398 未加载
评论 #8417690 未加载
评论 #8417783 未加载
评论 #8417879 未加载