I don't even understand why anyone cares about winamp anymore. Or how the company figured people should be happy to work for free on it without it being open source.

[–] babybus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago

Nostalgia.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 32 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

LOL. Those 3 weeks must have been really exciting at Llama Group. I can only imagine how the conversion went when the engineers tried to explain what FOSS means and the CEO understood none of it.

[–] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 39 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

They really just tried to get free labour.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 46 points 20 hours ago

They wanted free labor but own the changes.

They could have gotten free labor if they used a standard license like GPL or even MIT.

But nope. They were greedy.

[–] fulg@lemmy.world 8 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I thought I read elsewhere there were some GPL 2 parts in there too, I guess not.

I tried to find a source for this more credible than “I remember reading it on Lemmy” but couldn’t, now that the repo is deleted nobody can confirm. Perhaps some forks still exist… 🤔

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 9 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Perhaps some forks still exist…

No, that's impossible, because they didn't allow it 😭

[–] Scoopta@programming.dev 4 points 14 hours ago

According to the article they did allow it. They got rid of that clause in a license update, just didn't allow you to modify your fork lol