They were doing the former for a while; I don't know if they've rectified their behavior.
The former, which would be "stealing" open source code? That's not how open source works. You can't steal something that allows you to take it for free and modify it for your own needs. Unless they violated the GNU Affero license, then they did not nothing wrong.
BTW, Poal "stole" the source code for Throat if that's your definition of how open source code is to be used.
At first, they didn't disclose it was based on Mastodon at all. Then they posted the source for Mastodon on their website, without any of they changes they'd applied for their own use. I don't know if they're posting current source now but they might be.
Okay, so that's actually license violation, but who's going to police it really? They could take (((Trump))) to court, but good luck with that. This is the risk all open source projects must take if they go with any license that is more rigid than the MIT license or other completely open license.
(post is archived)