I'm the victim and yes, this is not entirelly about AI. If you have read the hall of shame, you'll know that they tends to lie. If it was only someone tried to use my code as their basis and forgot to include the attribution, after my notice they added, it's totally not worth a "hall of shame", and I'm actually glad that someone finally appreciates my works and make them useful.
But the reality is, they lied to everyone and I'm a chained victim. I was introduced to him by NativeScript, and before that he didn't even know the existence of rEFui. Now rEFui has become the most important fundament of their entire project, clearly indicates that they want to get something for nothing from the very beginning.
Till now they still didn't answer me why they made the basic mistakes and how it was fixed.They avoid everything I ask about them unless I presure them very hard, they'll give a very vage respond that answers nothing.
> is it legal to start with MIT and change to Apache midway?
As the author of the project, I have every right to change the license to anything. But also, I didn't wash the history to hide that the project was MIT. Technically I can, but that actually violates MIT itself and I don't want to be someone that say one thing and do another.
> even with attribution clearly given
They won't until I presured them very hard. They also washed much more than my projects, but also without attribution until I notified those project's authors. Actually, till now the code are still not fully attributed, only few get a proper attribution. They have now extracted code blocks from my original project into many many small separated files (potentially trying to hide the origin even further), but the code logic are actually not changed at all. According to those license, each piece of code they extract should keep an attribution to my original project.
I have a backup of the deleted project that contains the entire commit history of how he laundered these projects, and I can provide the entire Discord message history if you need evidence of all my statements.
But the reality is, they lied to everyone and I'm a chained victim. I was introduced to him by NativeScript, and before that he didn't even know the existence of rEFui. Now rEFui has become the most important fundament of their entire project, clearly indicates that they want to get something for nothing from the very beginning.
Till now they still didn't answer me why they made the basic mistakes and how it was fixed.They avoid everything I ask about them unless I presure them very hard, they'll give a very vage respond that answers nothing.
> is it legal to start with MIT and change to Apache midway?
As the author of the project, I have every right to change the license to anything. But also, I didn't wash the history to hide that the project was MIT. Technically I can, but that actually violates MIT itself and I don't want to be someone that say one thing and do another.
> even with attribution clearly given
They won't until I presured them very hard. They also washed much more than my projects, but also without attribution until I notified those project's authors. Actually, till now the code are still not fully attributed, only few get a proper attribution. They have now extracted code blocks from my original project into many many small separated files (potentially trying to hide the origin even further), but the code logic are actually not changed at all. According to those license, each piece of code they extract should keep an attribution to my original project.
I have a backup of the deleted project that contains the entire commit history of how he laundered these projects, and I can provide the entire Discord message history if you need evidence of all my statements.