You are absolutely violating GPL3 and MIT licenses and making malicious competition

[lijinhong11]

#286

[lijinhong11]

Your lock action prove it is real
What a shame!

[virgil698]

lol

[virgil698]

“Hidden as low-quality”

[Toffikk]

No, it got locked as its getting too heated with no productive feedback

[WindsorMacmillan]

I'm curious to know who your team's next target for code plagiarism will be. Must be feeling pretty smug about getting the plagiarized project to delete its repository, right?

[Dueris]

I dont know what's happening, but can someone please for the love of god just calm down and wait until I at least am within the same state of my home?

Ill make a comment on this later I just need to be caught up

[ApartTUSITU]

locking down the issue and giving it the cold shoulder will not bring you good results

you must respond directly

[virgil698]

No, it got locked as its getting too heated with no productive feedback

You directly used code originating from Luminol without preserving the necessary attribution, copyright notices, or license information, and then tried to dismiss the issue by claiming that “attribution is optional under GPLv3.” That is certainly impressive. If you genuinely believe there was no violation, then respond to the specific code comparisons, commit history, and licensing issues point by point instead of avoiding them.

[Dueris]

I also literally just woke up and I need to get ready to go to the farmers market with my Grandad and Uncle, so Im like not available to comment rn bc I literally am not even home

[Toffikk]

Please keep things productive and without low quality comments as otherwise we’ll have to ban you from the repo which we dont want to do. We are always open to productive diecussions but not to harassment

[Toffikk]

No, it got locked as its getting too heated with no productive feedback

You directly used code originating from Luminol without preserving the necessary attribution, copyright notices, or license information, and then tried to dismiss the issue by claiming that “attribution is optional under GPLv3.” That is certainly impressive. If you genuinely believe there was no violation, then respond to the specific code comparisons, commit history, and licensing issues point by point instead of avoiding them.

That wasn’t dueris. It was some person not affiliated with our team in any way

[virgil698]

I also literally just woke up and I need to get ready to go to the farmers market with my Grandad and Uncle, so Im like not available to comment rn bc I literally am not even home

You can take a look at these two posts. They are written in Chinese, so I recommend reading them with Google Translate:

https://www.nexusmc.cn/forum/post/luminolmc-canvasmc-gpl-3-0
https://www.nexusmc.cn/forum/post/luminolmc-canvasmc-earthme

[Dueris]

As from the quick glances I've seen, it's screenshots of old things that were ages ago that we talked about with the Luminol devs and FIXED I thoguht

If there are things in Canvas not correctly abiding by the license or not annotated by comments properly bro just make a PR or an issue report about that and we fix it

I dont understand what's even happening rn, but like I'm going to make mistakes, and also code CAN be similar to others, so it's just something we need an actual productive conversation about, not whatever the fuck this is

[virgil698]

No, it got locked as its getting too heated with no productive feedback

You directly used code originating from Luminol without preserving the necessary attribution, copyright notices, or license information, and then tried to dismiss the issue by claiming that “attribution is optional under GPLv3.” That is certainly impressive. If you genuinely believe there was no violation, then respond to the specific code comparisons, commit history, and licensing issues point by point instead of avoiding them.

That wasn’t dueris. It was some person not affiliated with our team in any way

Thanks for the clarification. I’ll correct the attribution and make it clear that the person was not affiliated with the CanvasMC team.

However, my main concern is still the underlying code and licensing dispute. Could an official CanvasMC maintainer respond directly to the specific code comparisons, commit history, and claims raised by LuminolMC?

[Dueris]

Ill respond later