bjorney

  • 0 Posts
  • 5 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 25th, 2023

help-circle
  • Malt is the absolute cheapest part of brewing beer, I buy 55lb bags of it for $80 CAD (so like 40-60 USD), and there are multiple shops near me I can buy from. You only need a pot, a big ass mesh bag, a carboy/airlock, and a bottle capper if you don’t have swing top bottles.

    To make 5 gallons of basic ass beer (yields like 48-54 bottles) you need 8-10lbs of grain (1lb of which is the fancy $2/lb malt; and 2lbs of which can be subbed for minute rice if you are doing an adjunct ale). You need 1, maybe 2oz of hops (hallertau is $2.50/oz). Yeast is $4-8 but is a 1 time cost because it’s reusable. To make an IPA your malt cost is 25% higher and your hop cost is like 4x

    The economics are actually great, but that’s fully contingent on you 1) placing no value on your time, and 2) not getting hooked and spending thousands on a stainless steel, PID controlled electronic brewing system, or a 4 tap home draught system (I did both)


  • These don’t fall under section 10 though - 7A through F detail the terms that are explicitly exempt from the restriction on adding additional terms.

    Other people have argued that these are contradictory - but you don’t need trademark rights to display a logo if the purpose of the display is to directly refer to the trademarked material. They are likely hoping for something along the lines of “powered by <onlyoffice logo>”. For example, Coca Cola logos and trademarks have appeared in TONS of Pepsi marketing materials, because those trademarks were used to directly refer to the coca cola brand, which is fair use.

    I think what it comes down to is whether the courts see “displaying the logo” as “reasonable” attribution or not.



  • The AGPL license allows the license holder to specify additional terms of the license that require preservation of specified reasonable attributions or legal notices - this is covered in 7B, and the onlyoffice license specifies that the logo must be preserved for attribution.

    Assuming a logo legally counts as reasonable attribution (IANAL) that would put only office in the right here, but holy shit, the fact that the license allows these modifications to be put on line #655 rather than line #2 is absurd. I, like most people I assume, only read far enough into the license to figure out whether it’s MIT or GPL