Comment by nananana9
7 hours ago
Well there's this little pesky thing in the MIT license:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
That's what he was asking for, a mention in the credits.
He got his name in the credits. The question was if he is owed anything else. The contract he created says he was not. I’m simply suggesting he might need a different contract.
I bet if you caught a homerun ball in a baseball game, you wouldn't give it to the kid next to you because "I don't owe the kid anything".
But only after $$ was made.
If the comment above is correct, he was only added to the credits after he had to ask for it after the fact.
So the ONLY thing the license asked for is to be named and that was supposedly violated. So a multi million dollar company can just violate a generous license and then after a fact cling to this exact license while arguing to not pay a single cent more than the license asked for. Alright...
Only if he wants to force something different. Which it seems he does not.
Since he eventually got the credit, your unfairness argument better build entirely on the damage the creator suffered by the delay of his credit.