Comment by gtirloni 2 years ago It looks they are not violating anything though. 3 comments gtirloni Reply jdbernard 2 years ago That's why he is regretting the use of the MIT license. He wonders, now, if having chosen a less permissive license would have given him grounds to shut them down, because they would be in violation. yjftsjthsd-h 2 years ago Hang on - permissive licenses still require attribution. If they're not doing that, then he can absolutely DCMA them.(I think; IANAL) spencerflem 2 years ago Not on the rendered web site, only in source code
jdbernard 2 years ago That's why he is regretting the use of the MIT license. He wonders, now, if having chosen a less permissive license would have given him grounds to shut them down, because they would be in violation. yjftsjthsd-h 2 years ago Hang on - permissive licenses still require attribution. If they're not doing that, then he can absolutely DCMA them.(I think; IANAL) spencerflem 2 years ago Not on the rendered web site, only in source code
yjftsjthsd-h 2 years ago Hang on - permissive licenses still require attribution. If they're not doing that, then he can absolutely DCMA them.(I think; IANAL) spencerflem 2 years ago Not on the rendered web site, only in source code
That's why he is regretting the use of the MIT license. He wonders, now, if having chosen a less permissive license would have given him grounds to shut them down, because they would be in violation.
Hang on - permissive licenses still require attribution. If they're not doing that, then he can absolutely DCMA them.
(I think; IANAL)
Not on the rendered web site, only in source code