Can I get an ST legal opinion on something slightly interesting (in the development world)? :)
Posted by
Beryllium (aka grayman)
Mar 23 '16, 20:17
|
Yesterday a minor legal battle escalated and broke thousands of projects (not any of mine).
An open source developer created a project called "kik" and released it on a package management service called "npm". He claims he didn't know it conflicted with a company called Kik that makes a product called Kik Messenger. And his product doesn't compete, it does something else entirely.
Anyway. A patent agent for Kik, named Bob, contacted the developer, named Azer, to try and obtain the "Kik" package name on "npm".
Things spiralled out of control (because Bob is seemingly unencumbered by common sense), and Azer ended up requesting that npm remove ALL of his packages.
One of them was a tiny little library that provided one single 10-line function called "left-pad". It turns out that *half* of the JavaScript ecosystem depended on this library, so once it disappeared, no one could build or install any of those apps.
So the debacle is kind of a big deal. Some people are accusing Azer of overreacting. Others are accusing npm and its CEO (Isaac) of too easily acquiescing to a mere discussion with a patent agent, and not real legal action. Still others place the blame on Kik alone.
Anyway. I've linked a medium post that presents the initial email thread between all three parties. My question is: what is the appropriate response to Bob when he asks if some compensation would help?
Is it risky to actually respond "$X dollars would be nice", or would that be something Bob could forward to the lawyers to say "Look, this guy is ransoming our stuff or extorting us or something!"?
On a broader non-legal note, is Azer throwing a childish temper tantrum by removing all his modules? He's clearly affronted by Isaac's handling of the situation & not really able to trust npm/Isaac any more, and Bob was clearly being a dick by saying "I don't mean to be a dick" ...
|
Responses:
|
