News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Ollama: All Aboard Open Models. Parent comment

Re:Ollama: All Aboard Open Models by pierotofy on Sunday July 19, 2026 @12:55PM (#48969738)
Taking credit for other people's work while raising millions? Yeah, pretty bad and relevant.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ollama: All Aboard Open Models by inigyou on Sunday July 19, 2026 @01:29PM (#48970020)
See also: why friends don't let friends use permissive software licenses.

The llama.cpp authorized ollama to do this... Unintentionally.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ollama: All Aboard Open Models by msm_ on Sunday July 19, 2026 @05:41PM (#48971936)
Literally the main point of this blog post:

>The project’s binary distributions didn’t include the required MIT license notice for the llama.cpp code they were shipping. This isn’t a matter of open-source etiquette, the MIT license has exactly one major requirement: include the copyright notice. Ollama didn’t.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ollama: All Aboard Open Models by inigyou on Monday July 20, 2026 @07:10AM (#48977166)
How sure are we that it didn't include the notice? There isn't any prescribed form or location for the notice, so you're trying to prove a negative.
[ Parent | on HN ]