AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#2This kind of drama is just sad.
I dont know if you are OP, but plenty of other UIs have interrogator code, like https://github.com/VoltaML/voltaML-fast-stable-diffusion/tre...
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#3bs claims i suppose reading this article. when you put a license in the root of the repo, you are saying "everything is covered by this license, unless otherwise stated specifically".
i don't see a problem in that. Unless the other party is alleging that they have removed AGPL license only to put the whole project under AGPL license, uh
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#4Anyone know this hlky person and could get their take on this?
The post seems to imply this person is a total d*k, but there’s always more than one side to the story
What’s hlky’s version of this?
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#5For those who know, what is that interrogator thing?
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#6For those who know, what is that interrogator thing?
It's image -> words, the inverse of stable diffusion.
see: https://github.com/pharmapsychotic/clip-interrogator
P.S. It's strange to me that this is a big deal, there are plenty of libraries for this stuff afaik, but I don't pay attention to licenses personally.
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#7Anyone know this hlky person and could get their take on this? The post seems to imply this person is a total d*k, but there’s always more than one side to the story What’s hlky’s version of this?
When projects vendor or copy from other projects, license bodies typically include all relevant copyright statements and licenses even if the license body is the same as the parent project.
NodeJS uses the MIT license [1] and reproduces the license for the MIT-licensed Acorn.
OP stripped the copyright statement and license attribution without mentioning hlky or the originating project in the license file. OP proceeded to confuse matters by assuming that "AGPL" suffices. It seems like the copyright statement was the offense here.
A simple email or github issue might have resolved the matter. Given the tenor of the relationship between the OP and hlky it should be no surprise that hlky opted for the "nuclear option"
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#8bs claims i suppose reading this article. when you put a license in the root of the repo, you are saying "everything is covered by this license, unless otherwise stated specifically". i don't see a problem in that. Unless the other party is alleging that they have removed AGPL license only to put the whole project under AGPL license, uh
As I read the article the issue is not the license. The issue is (allegedly) stripping the copyright information. If you use code under any license you get a permission from the authors to use it under the given terms. The authors still retain the copyright and most licenses require you to retain the copyright information, some even to display a prominent notice. This is important if the project ever chooses to relicense - they can’t just change the license of code that they don’t have the copyright for.
So, if you ever use code from someone else, track where it came from.
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#9I mean, read the diff and decide for yourself:
https://github.com/Haidra-Org/hordelib/commit/568738d68b6343...
I find it hard to be sympathetic, personally.
You don't remove copyright notices when you copy code files from one repo to another.
This is seemly a clearly vindictive and deliberate action by the OP to remove credit for the files, due to whatever personal history:
> I would rather not have any mention or contribution of this person in our library, as they go against everything the Free Software movement stands for!
The GPL FAQ is unambiguous on this point: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#IWantCredit
It's petty and seems quite dishonest to file a DMCA for something like this, and fixing it should give you a perfectly ok license to continue to use it.
...but just think, if you hadn't been petty and removed it in the first place, it wouldn't have been an issue at all.
To some degree, you reap what you sow.
Re: AI Horde’s AGPL3 hordelib receives DMCA take-down from hlky
#10I mean, read the diff and decide for yourself: https://github.com/Haidra-Org/hordelib/commit/568738d68b6343... I find it hard to be sympathetic, personally. You don't remove copyright notices when you copy code files from one repo to another. This is seemly a clearly vindictive and deliberate action by the OP to remove credit for the files, due to whatever personal history: > I would rather not have any mention or co…
Also - isn't it critical to maintain details of copyright holders in case of any future desire to relicence?