• raoul@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    [He cloned] another AI editor … covered under the Apache open source license [and] slapped its own made-up closed license … which Pan admitted was written by ChatGPT.

    Who gives a shit, rigth?

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 months ago

      Apache explicitly allows this. I don’t get why OSI bros are endlessly surprised by this.

      • David Gerard@awful.systemsM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        They apparently copied without attribution in a manner that was a violation? I’m still looking for precise wording of the PEL.

        It’s very hard to violate the Apache license, but these are the sort of bozos who could manage it.

        EDIT: Here is the PEL. It lacks the attribution requirements of section 4 of the Apache Licence 2.0. So yeah, they managed it.

        This is a small technical violation that’s easily remedied, but I understand that’s what got people pissed off.

      • Soyweiser@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m a little bit in the camp of ‘it might be legal, but that doesn’t mean it is ok’. So I get why people are annoyed. Also copying a whole project and then slamming a different license on it and going ‘jobs done’ very much fits the promptfondler vibe, so im not mad, more of a ‘lol, of course they did’ thing. But that is me.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, pretty bad coverage of that by the article.

        Apache isn’t GPL, and it isn’t an oversight that it allows closed source derivative works.

      • anachronist
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Apache explicitly allows this

        Literally the only thing Apache license requires is attribution. It is very hard to violate the Apache license. But through the power of ChatGPT, these guys did—indeed—manage to violate the license.

  • Sailor Sega Saturn@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The license stuff is whatever, but Imagine seeing this sort of sloppiness in the revision history and thinking “Yeah these guys seem legit let’s give them a million dollars!” We are in such a bubble.