Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Notepad++ Creator Calls Out 'Fake' Mac App Over Trademark Violation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
klasma
macrumors G4
I was just about to install notepad++ and noted it was on a different site, and no reference to it on the windows app site.
I ten decided to carry on with cotEditor
some major issues with Notepad++ being hacked was acknowledged earlier this year so is quite important to ensure its downloaded from official sites
notepad-plus-plus.org
I ten decided to carry on with cotEditor
some major issues with Notepad++ being hacked was acknowledged earlier this year so is quite important to ensure its downloaded from official sites
Notepad++ Hijacked by State-Sponsored Hackers | Notepad++
bearda
macrumors 6502a
Let’s ask RedHat. Or Elastic. There are PLENTY of companies that have released their software as open source but trademarked the product. You’re free to fork and redistribute the software as long as you change the branding. Nothing shady about it, they just make their money off commercial support and such.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. It's both so ridiculous and yet so sadly plausible.
Trademark and copyright are two different things. GPL famously is "copyleft" but ask RMS how he feels about the name GNU and where and how it is used...
spyguy10709
macrumors 65816
So every Linux distribution that calls itself Linux is in violation of Linux's trademarks?
Somebody better go tell Red Hat, Ubuntu, Mint, Valve, Debian, Arch, better sound the alarm that there's no way to open source a name!
Obviously I'm describing a social norm - if that's a challenge for you to grasp, I'm not sure we're really aligned in conversation here.
The Ship of Theseus is a philosophical problem concerning identity. Imagine a ship has every old plank replaced, one by one, until none of the original wood remains. Is it still the same ship? Now, image a program is compiled with a different compiler on a different machine and has each bug fixed, one by one, until it runs on the other machine. Is it still the same program? It's okay if you don't understand.
No. You are incorrect. If you look at the websites of those distributors, you’ll find a line on the site that says something to the effect of “Linux is the trademark of Linus Torvalds and used with permission of the Linux foundation” or that they describe their distribution as “Linux-based.” They do not claim ownership of Linux or try to pass it off as their own creation.
It’s not a social norm, it’s the law. You don’t think that all of the companies that redistribute open source software have lawyers who deal with open source licensing? Who deal specifically with open source communities to make sure they’re not infringing on the rights of the original authors?
Last edited:
Yeah, I know what the Ship of Theseus problem is. But again, I don’t see how it applies. If you did what you’re describing, you’ve created a fork of the software. If the software was available via an open source license, you were allowed to do that. You still built your work on what someone else created.
If you want to flip your analogy around, if you took a ship that already existed and rebuilt it piece by piece with new parts, do you get to claim that you created the ship?
LogicalApex
macrumors 68000
Not the way it works at all.
Trademarks do allow you to include another product in the name, but it has to include wording to clarify that it isn't connected.
"NotePad for Mac" wouldn't infringe upon Notepad's trademark (if MS has one for it anyway), for instance.
"Red Hat Linux" isn't the same as "Linux" just so much as "Windows" isn't the same as a Window on your house.
Either way, the Linux Foundation has specific guidelines for the use of their trademark.
Trademark Usage | Linux Foundation
The Linux Foundation trademark usage policy.
www.linuxfoundation.org
The ONLY way this would have been OK would have been if the developer got approval from the maintainers of Notepad++. To allow them to be an "official" version for Mac using the trademark under license. Doesn't mean the license has to cost money, but it would have to be OK with the Notepad++ maintainers. Which makes sense as Notepad++ has been around a long time. People have a trust for the quality of the brand...
Trust is a big deal in OSS and software in general. This developer has made my trust hard to gain. Others are free to make their own decisions, of course.
insomniac86
macrumors 6502a
It's not on the App Store and never was. Fascinating....
CarlJ
Contributor
Alternatively, the developer of the port could have contacted the OG developer way in advance of release, to notify them they were doing the work and inquire about permission to use the trademarked name and/or negotiate another name (avoiding post-release arguments of a variant name being "too close") ahead of release.
Seoras
macrumors 6502a
I'd guess because he doesn't like Apple or MacOS.
I've run into too many anti-Apple zealots.
There's the flip side too. Jobs himself famously said on stage in 2003 "Hell froze over" to describe the launch of iTunes for Windows having previously said he'd never port iTunes to Microsofts platforms.
Why do people get all religious about technology?
uacd
macrumors 68000
Well at least he took the effort and made a Mac version, while original developer playing a crybaby about that. Tho I am glad that they have resolved it and Mac dev said he will rename the app. It looks so childish that it could have been solved privately, we don’t really need to see their dirty clothes around here.
From what I’ve checked, Mac version developer is a new dev and probably he failed to check rules of publishing. Probably a simple human error, not a “piracy” or “steal” as original dev tries to make us believe in this headline.
He explains a lot, even maybe way too much on his site about the app (such as that it has no telemetry or the history of Apple). But probably that’s how all app devs should make landing pages, so that you know EVERYTHING about the product you are about to download on your computer. Changing name to NextPad++ was a wise choice, sounds much better than obsolete Windows-esque “NotePad++”.
He seems to have good UI UX skills. Maybe he should consider changing this oldschool app UI to something that he uses on his own website: clean, elegant and probably something influenced by transparent designs (Liquid Glass but better). Original UI is way too bloated. It is functional but not modern at all
From what I’ve checked, Mac version developer is a new dev and probably he failed to check rules of publishing. Probably a simple human error, not a “piracy” or “steal” as original dev tries to make us believe in this headline.
He explains a lot, even maybe way too much on his site about the app (such as that it has no telemetry or the history of Apple). But probably that’s how all app devs should make landing pages, so that you know EVERYTHING about the product you are about to download on your computer. Changing name to NextPad++ was a wise choice, sounds much better than obsolete Windows-esque “NotePad++”.
He seems to have good UI UX skills. Maybe he should consider changing this oldschool app UI to something that he uses on his own website: clean, elegant and probably something influenced by transparent designs (Liquid Glass but better). Original UI is way too bloated. It is functional but not modern at all
Last edited:
It is at this point that Microsoft will come swinging into the argument suing both of them for using the 'Notepad' trademark!
Of course I am only joking.
Imitation is the highest form of flattery. I can understand the original authors concern but I think he has overreacted and would probably have been better off if he had sought to integrated the Mac version directly into the official repo. Not often someone does all the hard work of porting for you!
Of course I am only joking.
Imitation is the highest form of flattery. I can understand the original authors concern but I think he has overreacted and would probably have been better off if he had sought to integrated the Mac version directly into the official repo. Not often someone does all the hard work of porting for you!
Canyonrider
macrumors newbie
Wouldn't put it past them, but they've probably left it far too long (Notepad++ has been around since forever) & there would be a massive "Streisand effect" - I'd say that "Notepad++" is sufficiently distinctive from "Notepad", which is a pretty generic name. However, "Notepad++" is kinda, sorta the same as "Notepad++"...
Putting someone else's code into a repo you run kinda requires a lot of trust & assumption of risk, not to mention a lot of work on code review and testing for something that you're effectively about to "put your name to". The (official) NP++ author recently had a nasty experience with (serious) hackers trying hijack updates, so it is understandable to be jumpy when an unauthorised port suddenly pops up.
Unfortunately, whether it was via malice or naivety, the author of the Mac "port" has got off to a rocky start when it comes to establishing trust.
Probably because the original and true App was written to run natively on Windows and a Mac version would require a significant amount of work & ongoing support?
...especially if you wanted a proper native application which is one of the "selling" points of something like NP++ on Windows, vs. competitors like VS Code which are written in Javascript/Typescript and run under their own copy of the Chromium browser engine.
Haven't seen much written about whether the Mac "Notepad++" is actually any good...
Completely irrelevant to this discussion - if Theseus legally or morally owns the trademark "The Ship of Theseus", he's entitled to strap six barrels together and call it "The Ship of Theseus". If Odysseus builds a down-to-the-last-nail replica of Theseus's original ship, he has no right to call it "The Ship of Theseus (Mac version)" because he isn't Theseus.
This debate is not about copyright of the code - NP++ is open source, anybody is allowed to take the source and modify it and release their own version of the program. It's about trademarks, logos, appropriate attribution and - in particular - any implication that a "fork" has been somehow approved, or produced in collaboration with, the author of the original.
Most Open Source licenses are pretty strong on "no liability or assurances" and don't extend to the use of trademarks and logos. Some open source projects (e.g. Linux) publish separate terms and conditions under which you can use the trademark and logo - but that's an addition to the GPL license on the source code.
If you want to get philosophical, there are formal/mathematical methods for describing algorithms independently of any implementation so, in theory any program can be reduced to an abstract mathematical definition & mathematically proven (or not) to be equivalent to another program. Not so easy in practice for a complete application - but maybe with individual procedures. The bit that's protected by law, though, is the coding of the specific implementation.
The process for making a copyright-free functional equivalent of a piece of software by reducing it to a specification and independently re-implementing it has been established - notably used to clone the original IBM PC firmware:
...today, IBM would probably have tried to block that with patents (which shouldn't apply, but IBM can afford a lot of justice).
In practice, the difficulty of porting to a different system depends how much of the program structure needs to be changed to work on the new system, but in most cases large portions of the original source code go across intact and clearly recognisable as the original. It's good development practice to keep OS-dependent code separate from the underlying program logic. So it's Theseus' ship with new rigging & a coat of paint. Which is perfectly fine with open source software.
++TextEdit (because otherwise TextEdit++ returns the original value of TextEdit)
thadoggfather
macrumors P6
This AppStore's built in "walled off garden" approach is increasingly full of holes in the fence:
www.macrumors.com
It needs to be re-examined in greater detail, IMO.
Apple Removes Fake Crypto Wallet App That Stole $9.5 Million From Mac Users
A fake Mac app designed to look like the real thing snuck past Apple's app review team, costing users $9.5 million in cryptocurrency. According to CoinDesk, a fake macOS version of the Ledger Live crypto wallet app scammed people into handing over access to their cryptocurrency wallets. More...
www.macrumors.com
It needs to be re-examined in greater detail, IMO.