Interesting case. Based upon the screenshots, it doesn't looking like they're trying to hide things though. Not like a typical fork and hide-via-rebrand. The web UI still shows Minio, and the CLI example shows the Minio copyright and link to the codebase repo.
I'd be interested to know if the "About" link in show shown WebUI screenshot goes to Minio or Weka. If it goes to Minio, could that be considered (combined with the minio branding) showing attribution? Has a Weka customer been rejected sources upon request for the AGPL works (Or been told they're soley using the apache code)?
There's also an interesting question of how the GPL/AGPL copyleft acts in this mode of distribution. From the screenshot, they're distributed in a single ZIP but the (potential AGPL) works appear to be in their own image. So does that act as separate networked applications, and therefore copyleft does not affect the other images (bit still with a requirement to share sources with the AGPL) or does that count as a single combined works?
I'd be interested to know if the "About" link in show shown WebUI screenshot goes to Minio or Weka. If it goes to Minio, could that be considered (combined with the minio branding) showing attribution? Has a Weka customer been rejected sources upon request for the AGPL works (Or been told they're soley using the apache code)?
There's also an interesting question of how the GPL/AGPL copyleft acts in this mode of distribution. From the screenshot, they're distributed in a single ZIP but the (potential AGPL) works appear to be in their own image. So does that act as separate networked applications, and therefore copyleft does not affect the other images (bit still with a requirement to share sources with the AGPL) or does that count as a single combined works?