5 ms·

> it also violated the GPL license of DiffusionBee: https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11sqkh9/glaze_is_violating_gpl/ https://www.reddit.com/r/S

• GaggiX 4y ago
  I think that the authors of Glaze released the code after it was discovered. Edit: https://mobile.twitter.com/ravenben/status/1636439335569375238 https://mobile.twitter.com/ravenben/status/16364393355693752..., he is talking about releasing the code behind the front-end even if the back-end also violates the license.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • zarzavat 4y ago
    Is DiffusionBee AGPL? If not, they don’t have to release any backend code if they are not distributing it as binaries or obfuscated code. GPL says: if you distribute something that is based upon GPL code, then you must be prepared to offer the full code to the thing you distributed, on demand. You can even charge a reasonable fee to cover your costs. Someone asked them for the code, they responded by publishing it, so there has been no GPL violation. There is only a violation if they refuse a valid request.
    • GaggiX 4y ago
      The backend is obfuscated using Pyarmor.