Comment by cosmojg
7 months ago
For what it's worth, I think Kimi's modified MIT license still meets the OSI definition of "open source." For example, the explicitly OSI-approved "Attribute Assurance License"[1] contains similar wording:
> each time the resulting executable program or a program dependent thereon is launched, a prominent display (e.g., splash screen or banner text) of the Author’s attribution information
It probably doesn't because the attribution requirement discriminates against certain groups (large commercial organisations).
Huh, I hadn't seen that one before!