• Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’m actually not that shocked. Corporations make weird corporate decisions all the time because they feel as if they’re getting the more professional version or something. They tend to view open source projects as either unprofessional or in some complicated way, actually illegal. Like it’ll turn out that open source isn’t allowed after all.

    This is what happens when lawyers who don’t actually know what they’re talking about make recommendations. They don’t know, so they always advise caution. Also they genuinely don’t seem to know the difference between pirated software and open source.

    • Avg@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      6 months ago

      The reason corporation are like that is because the responsibility is with the employee the decided to use the open source tool, when there is another company backing a product, there is someone to hold accountable. Also, there is a support number if shit hits the fan, and guarantee of support long term if the supplier is financial healthy.

      • hglman
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Also corruption where the person choosing to pay Oracle also is an owner of Oracle.

    • Fungah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m currently involved in a legal case in which I produced audio recordings. I was questioned intensely by the other sides lawyer about the modified date on windows.

      I kept asking him to clarify what he meant by modified until he said “I don’t know”.

      Like. Ffs.