| ▲ | NoahZuniga 3 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
The post states: > One example where this requirement wasn't violated, is on build.nvidia.com But built with llama isn't shown prominently, so this is actually an example of a violation of the license. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | thot_experiment 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
That's just like, your opinion man. This entire discussion and blog post are purely a fun distraction, legal contracts don't work how programmers think they work. The only definition of "prominently" that matters is the one the judge rules on when Zuck sues you. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | dangus 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Meta is free to license Llama from Meta under a different license are they not? | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||