• moonpiedumplings@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    What stops companies from having a shell corporation use the code, and then that shell company rents “services” at a very low cost to a large corp?

    I’m thinking something of the opposite if what Google does, where Alphabet (““located”” in Ireland) rents the Google logo to Google, allowing Google to say that their revenue is much less than it actually is.

    EDIT: After some research, it seems that they stopped doing that: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/01/google-says-it-will-no-longer-use-double-irish-dutch-sandwich-tax-loophole

    But a similar scheme being applied to this license does concern me.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I share the concern. However, just because things are hard doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be done. The current free-loading situation of mega-corps is disgusting and if that can be deterred, stifled, or hamstrung, I’m for it. The solution cannot be perfect because legal code is just like code: never perfect. There will always be a loophole somewhere, it just shouldn’t be made extremely obvious and easy to find. The harder it is to circumvent, the better.

      P.S Fuck Google regardless

      Anti Commercial-AI license