1827 sats \ 2 replies \ @nout 27 Feb \ on: AJ Towns censoring on Delving Bitcoin to cover Bitcoin Core backdoors ? bitcoin
Here are the original posts backed up: https://github.com/jamesob/delving-bitcoin-archive/blob/master/archive/rendered-topics/2024-02-February/2024-02-22-workgroup-lifecycle-id598.md
It seems that @theariard mentioning that lawyers should be consulted is what triggered the response from AJ Towns, but I can't rule out "being a dick" on either side as the cause either... Quote:
At the very least, people engaging in such private communication channels should consult lawyers in the main major juridictions, if such communication practice is not specially tainting their responsibilities in case of future FOSS software defect in some way.
write
preview
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @theariard OP 3 Mar
See what I said above:
"I had especially in mind the CSW’s database case, where CSW is making claims based on a sui generis rights recognized by the EU laws. Whatever we can think of the EU laws legitimacy in this area, seeing how they can be leveraged against the interest of the Bitcoin ecosystem, especially we should be more careful of marking “original work” in critical Bitcoin areas the public domain. Systematically closing the doors to future CSW’s like judicial contests."
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @premitive1 27 Feb
Because if one outcome of such working group is this bitcoin/bitcoin#29319, this is a complete design process failure, given some of the mechanisms are either weak (v3 policy) or apparently useless (sibling evictions to remove CPFP carveout).
While we cannot prevent private communications among members belonging to and funded by the same development entity, I think we should socially discourage private communication channels about FOSS software among members of different development entities. Lack of publicity might be jeopardizing the MIT / Apache 2 license and the de facto entrance in the domain public of Bitcoin design ideas.
At the very least, people engaging in such private communication channels should consult lawyers in the main major juridictions, if such communication practice is not specially tainting their responsibilities in case of future FOSS software defect in some way.
reply