The modified MIT clause is sneakier than people think. Hit 100M users or $20M a month and you have to slap "Kimi K2.6" on your UI. That covers any consumer app worth building. Not really open, more like free until you matter. Llama pulled the same move

▲

brightball 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The threshold for "worth building" is much lower than that for a lot of people.

▲

Saline9515 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Attribution is a fair clause in opensource. What is the problem? You are making 20M$ a month thanks to their free work.

▲

svachalek 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Worth building with VC capital maybe. A small team putting together an app that pulled in $20M per year should be pretty pleased with that.

▲

throwaw12 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

if you reach that numbers, kimi would be your least of worries

▲

dcchambers 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'll definitely put this into the "good problem to have" category.

▲

risho 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

in what way does this restrict how you are able to use the model?

▲

codemog 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And the Kimi team broke the Anthropic ToS by training off Opus outputs and… nothing happened?

	▲	darksaints 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nobody cares, nor should they. Anthropic broke nearly every ToS of every website that they scraped data from. The AI robber barons just want to monopolize intellectual property violations, and I'm gonna cheer on any robin hoods that take it back from them.