> The author history was harder to understand. An earlier package file listed Pierre-Louis Favreau, Jean-Pierre Lo, and Nicolas Dehandschoewercker. The version that replaced it removed all three names and substituted another author. The only change to the files was the author list. GitHub’s activity record shows that the replacement happened through a force push in August, before our investigation this September.
Wow, this looks pretty damning. I can't imagine Google seeing this as worth the risks. Is an innocent explanation possible here?
This is normal. I am not sure about pyproject.toml conventions but I would have done the same. This is the equivalent of telling you who the maintainers of the project are.
Usually what you see in the code is the retention of Copyright statements on source code and LICENSE.
If there is an innocent explanation, I'd love to hear it, because it kind of reads like the force push was done to move the commit with the attribution change out of the public eye so it wasnt clear what they had done.
That's not "trying to cover it up", that's a link to them adding credits that were missing, which is the main corrective action to get into compliance with the source project's license.
> We opened Google’s Artemis repository and recognised code we had written for mobile-use. Then we found our names in its history—and the change that removed them.
Did you read the post? They originally removed all traces of minitap and its contributors, and only added it back when they were called out.
Well I am shocked, who would have thought, an advertising company who prides themselves on not being evil, used code that wasn't credited.
I mean, if that's the case, we better start a revolution.
Wow, this looks pretty damning. I can't imagine Google seeing this as worth the risks. Is an innocent explanation possible here?
This is normal. I am not sure about pyproject.toml conventions but I would have done the same. This is the equivalent of telling you who the maintainers of the project are.
Usually what you see in the code is the retention of Copyright statements on source code and LICENSE.
They're trying to cover it up now
Did you read the post? They originally removed all traces of minitap and its contributors, and only added it back when they were called out.
(Although I would say it isn't a very good-faith effort to address the issue if they don't put back the author attributions they removed).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil
I was going to comment on the title's perpetuation of big IPs stealing/theft meme but it turns out that TFA did not use those words.