Community should have a better vetting process for speakers

Discussion
1

bringing this to your attention:

recently, seeing how people misuse open source has really irked me. Companies claim to be open source or even start open source projects, only to do a “rug pull.” They exploit the free hours and resources of volunteers, only to cheat them in the end.

I am active in FOSS communities, and recently, I noticed that Pune FOSS United invited YouTuber Arpit Bhayani. He’s good with tech, no doubt about that, but he has been abusing the open source movement. Let me explain:

  1. DiceDB is an exciting project, a technical marvel. However, it wasn’t open source at the beginning - it started with the BSL, which is not open source or FOSS license.

  2. Arpit advertised everywhere that it was open source. Since he has many followers, people eagerly jumped in to volunteer and help.

  3. He lied through his teeth and applied for the FLOSS Fund, claiming that the project was open source. He requested crores of rupees for a project that wasn’t even open source. The FOSS community called him out, and rightly so, he didn’t get any funding.

  4. He was also called out on Twitter - https://i.imgur.com/AVNnCLP.png (expect these tweet to get deleted now)

  5. They changed the license to AGPL, then to BSD, but conveniently forgot to ask the community for approval. Only after the license change did they consult the community. Now, there’s a CLA as well.

What really pains me now is that he is sharing the stage with Kailash Nadh to talk about open source. This guy is grifting, and because he has too many followers, no one seems to care. The Pune FOSS event costs money, and they are charging people to listen to such individuals.

I raised this issue with FOSS United, but they ignored it. I’m not sure if Kailash Nadh is aware of all this, or if he’s silently ignoring it too.

from: https://reddit.com/r/1jkxxwn/with_enou

6 Likes
2

First of all, thank you for bringing this up. If we find a process issue here, and if we are able to find a way to improve it, then that will be a good outcome from this thread !

Can you be a bit more specific about what you mean by “they ignored it” ? Did you receive a response to this issue ? Or is it that you do not agree with their response ?

I get a “Page Not Found” error for this.

2 Likes
3

The reddit post link: https://www.reddit.com/r/developersIndia/comments/1jkxxwn/with_enough_clout_and_followers_you_can_fool/

3 Likes
4

Thank you for speaking up.

Disclaimer - I work at FOSS United, these are my personal thoughts and not the official stance of the organisation. I moved on from this topic but responding here since people are asking if I posted the above thread ( I didn’t. I’ve already posted about this publicly so there’s no reason to do an anonymous post now )

I broadly had similar opinions as you. I’m glad that the author decided to make the project FOSS, even if they did it for strategic/tangible reasons but the openwashing here makes me very sad.

I already called this out on twitter when the talk proposal was submitted. You can also see the reviews on the talk proposal.

He was also called out on Twitter - https://i.imgur.com/AVNnCLP.png (expect these tweet to get deleted now)

Nothing will be deleted. :smile:

They changed the license to AGPL, then to BSD, but conveniently forgot to ask the community for approval. Only after the license change did they consult the community. Now, there’s a CLA as well.

This was my main trigger too. I specifically pointed this out in the twitter thread after which the CLA was added. FWIW, I still see major problems with the CLA in its present state.

  • It does not mention anything about past contributions. The license change happened in the past when there was no CLA. That does not solve anything.
  • I’m not 100% sure about this but I don’t think “I agree” chains on a github discussion are the best way to sign a CLA especially in a case like this. (can someone here shed some light on this?)
  • I’m the least aware about this point in particular but from what I understand, what they need is a CAA since they want copyright over all the contributions, not just a licensing agreement?

I did ask the author to run the CLA by a lawyer but not sure if they’ve done that.

I raised this issue with FOSS United, but they ignored it.

Sorry about this. Can you please specify whom you raised it with? This did not reach us (or at least, me). The forum or email ( foundation[at]fossunited[dot]org ) is the best way to bring this up so you’re at the right place now.

FWIW, this has already been brought up (by me) amongst the reviewers panel. We pushed for the CLA (because the relicensing was practically invalid before that) and the reviewers agreed to giving the project a platform once that was done. We can have our personal opinions about the project but please note that the project is technically FOSS (BSD is a strong FOSS license) and we can’t control what happens in the future.

I think you raise a valid point and I think the conference organisers and volunteers should take the final call here. This is an ambiguous situation at best and the FOSS United Foundation can’t/shouldn’t force a decision.

  • They can choose to reject the proposal if they agree with what you mentioned.
  • If they choose to go ahead with the proposal, I strongly think they should ask the speaker to specifically talk about the (multiple) license changes, the issues (and lack thereof) with the CLA and future plans for the project (including their thoughts on if they think the project will stay OSS in perpetuity).

If none of these things happen, please stay assured that the community will bring this up at the time of the talk (during QnA). Considering how much visibility this issue has got, I am reasonably sure someone from the audience (or even from the foundation) will feel obliged to bring this up. I personally feel that if the author is open to clarifiying these things, this might actually make for an interesting talk.

I’m not sure if Kailash Nadh is aware of all this, or if he’s silently ignoring it too.

Please don’t assume malice. Most people may not be aware of the things you pointed out, doesn’t mean they support this.

3 Likes
5

Happy to take all the questions during the talk. Here’s the gist

  1. DiceDB started as OSS (mostly MIT or Apache)
  2. It is a passion project
  3. Took some time to figure out our unique proposition and feasibility.
  4. Once I did it and got the proof of concept, I got a lot of inbound from VC
  5. seemed like a great business opportunity, so changed it to BSL.
  6. got a few teamsheets, but I realized, that BSL is not the right way to proceed with the database. Because I see the value in it being a strong FOSS.
  7. Met Kailash and he tipped me to the other side and made me understand why DiceDB should be OSS and how it will benefit the entire ecosystem. He suggested AGPL.
  8. I switched to AGPL
  9. Then I met engg leaders at Google and Amazon and found out that AGPL is a strong no for them.
  10. Hence I switched to BSD.

My hope and vision is to make DiceDB adopted in GCP and AWS. I am a passionate engineer who wants to build things. As an engineer, I would be happy to see the stuff I build outlive me.

Hence, happy with BSD and building DiceDB because it is fun.

Regarding CLA, I have no idea about it. I focussed on building and not legalities. Never thought it would have legal implications. If that’s a problem for anyone to adopt, I am happy to find a work around.

once, Ansh pointed out, I added CLA and will ensure the due process is followed.

2 Likes
6

@jane_doe Today morning, I noticed that the panel you were referring to is no longer listed on the scheduled sessions list of PuneFOSS. Bringing this to your attention just in case you haven’t noticed it already (Disclaimer - I have nothing to do with this!)

@Arpit_Bhayani TIL that DiceDB was originally FOSS! I think you are missing why some folks in the community may have an objection to your talk (read the OP’s post again please). This is the part where you applied to the FLOSS fund. At that time, DiceDB was BSL licensed, which isn’t considered a FOSS license… When this was pointed out to you, you made it pretty clear that you had applied to get visibility. I also told you at the time that this wasn’t in good faith. For the record : You are the only one, out of 147 entities, that has applied with a non-free license (for source code) to the FLOSS/fund. It’s quite clear that that didn’t happen because you didn’t know that BSL wasn’t a FOSS license.

Why is this important ? It’s because FOSS United is a community - mostly volunteer run, and we value such things. Folks here have been volunteering to find true FOSS projects that need funding, make them aware of the FLOSS fund, and in many cases even convincing them to apply. All that takes effort, time and conviction. I hope you can appreciate now why your act of applying to the FLOSS fund wasn’t appreciated, and why what you wrote on twitter may have upset some people.

When community members get upset they voice their concerns - this is about ethics, as much as licenses. This is why some here (me included) feel that you shouldn’t be talking about FOSS in a community conference.

Your project may well be a valuable contribution - but the timing of you giving a talk at a community conference just doesn’t seem right to me, at-least not right now. Note again that this is just my personal opinion, and it may well change with time. It will be interesting to see how DiceDB evolves next !

3 Likes