Ollama violating llama.cpp license for over a year

> The terms of the MIT license require that it distribute the copyright notice in both source and binary form.

No, MIT does not require that. The license says:

> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

The exact meaning of this sentence has never been challenged and never been ruled upon. Considering ollama's README has a link to llama.cpp's project page (which includes the license), I'd say the requirement has been satisfied.

“Linking to a page that includes” is not the same as “including”. I don’t think that the requirement is satisfied.

I have been aware that Ollama is based on/uses llama.cpp since the first day I started using Ollama. It is not like Ollama is trying to hide the use of llama,cpp, but sure, it would be a good idea in the Ollama app to have a reference in an 'About' menu item, or some such place.

It is certainly possible for a new Ollama user to not notice the acknowledgement.