If a rogue laptop violates the Llama license and no one is around to enforce it, did it really break the Llama license?

Seriously, I genuinely wonder what the purpose of adding random unenforceable licenses to code/binaries. Meta knows people don’t read license agreements, so if they’re not interested in enforcing a weird naming convention, why stipulate it at all?

The guy who wrote this article is likely the only person to self-report to the police that he might have broken a dumb rule published by a huge company that manipulates and deceives millions of people every minute... haha