🔍Learn how a small company used legal threats to shut down an open-source project.
🕵️Explore the journey of an intern and their experience with bullying from a CEO.
⚖️Understand the ethical concerns raised by the CEO and the intern's response.
🔄Discover how the open-source project was restored after the confrontation.
🌐Learn about the implications and impact of legal threats on open-source projects.
What is repet and how does it work?
—Repet is a small company that provides a web app to run code in different programming languages. It offers features like sharing work, installing third-party packages, and hosting web apps.
What was the intern's open-source project about?
—The intern created an online playground for programming languages, allowing users to run code in various languages. The project gained popularity for its fast execution and support for multiple programming languages.
Why did repet accuse the intern of unethical behavior?
—Repet accused the intern of stealing their design and copying internal design decisions. However, the intern argues that their project was inspired by publicly available blog posts and other similar websites.
How did the intern respond to repet's accusations?
—The intern denied any intention of stealing ideas and requested specific details on what was considered problematic. However, repet refused to provide further information.
Was the open-source project restored after the confrontation?
—Yes, the project was restored after the CEO received backlash for their behavior. The intern's code was not found to be a clone or a violation of intellectual property rights.
00:00In this YouTube video, the story of how a small company used legal threats to shut down an open-source project is revealed.
03:43The intern shares their perspective on the confrontation with the CEO of repet and discusses the unethical behavior displayed.
07:26The intern provides details about their open-source project, its similarities to repet's product, and the lack of intention to copy any designs.
09:36The CEO's response to the intern's inquiry is shared, along with the intern's technical rebuttal.
12:20Repet refuses to provide specific details on the accusations, leading to further debate and the restoration of the intern's project.
