#chardet — Public Fediverse posts

サクラエディタのGREPが遅くて、AIと自作したら chardet に何度もハマった話
https://qiita.com/hoshi-gmoconnect/items/387ce2e9b1b4c87adc41?utm_campaign=popular_items&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=popular_items

#qiita #Python #grep #文字コード #Chardet #ClaudeCode

サクラエディタのGREPが遅くて、AIと自作したら chardet に何度もハマった話
https://qiita.com/hoshi-gmoconnect/items/387ce2e9b1b4c87adc41?utm_campaign=popular_items&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=popular_items

#qiita #Python #grep #文字コード #Chardet #ClaudeCode

Can Agentic AI Coding Tools Finally End Copyright For Software While Re-Inventing Open Source?

https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://www.techdirt.com/2026/04/03/can-agentic-ai-coding-tools-finally-end-copyright-for-software-while-re-inventing-open-source/

I'm looking at Repology, and I think most of the distributions and other downstreams have rightfully boycotted #Python #chardet #copywashing. Of course, there's the possibility that some of them are simply out-of-date, though.

So far chardet-7 is distributed by #Chromebrew, #CondaForge (not on Repology), #Homebrew, #KaOS, #OpenIndiana, #openmamba, #Ravenports, #Spack and #T2 SDE. Shame on you!

https://repology.org/project/chardet/versions
https://repology.org/project/python%3Achardet/versions

I'm looking at Repology, and I think most of the distributions and other downstreams have rightfully boycotted #Python #chardet #copywashing. Of course, there's the possibility that some of them are simply out-of-date, though.

So far chardet-7 is distributed by #Chromebrew, #CondaForge (not on Repology), #Homebrew, #KaOS, #OpenIndiana, #openmamba, #Ravenports, #Spack and #T2 SDE. Shame on you!

https://repology.org/project/chardet/versions
https://repology.org/project/python%3Achardet/versions

I'm looking at Repology, and I think most of the distributions and other downstreams have rightfully boycotted #Python #chardet #copywashing. Of course, there's the possibility that some of them are simply out-of-date, though.

So far chardet-7 is distributed by #Chromebrew, #CondaForge (not on Repology), #Homebrew, #KaOS, #OpenIndiana, #openmamba, #Ravenports, #Spack and #T2 SDE. Shame on you!

https://repology.org/project/chardet/versions
https://repology.org/project/python%3Achardet/versions

I'm looking at Repology, and I think most of the distributions and other downstreams have rightfully boycotted #Python #chardet #copywashing. Of course, there's the possibility that some of them are simply out-of-date, though.

So far chardet-7 is distributed by #Chromebrew, #CondaForge (not on Repology), #Homebrew, #KaOS, #OpenIndiana, #openmamba, #Ravenports, #Spack and #T2 SDE. Shame on you!

https://repology.org/project/chardet/versions
https://repology.org/project/python%3Achardet/versions

I'm looking at Repology, and I think most of the distributions and other downstreams have rightfully boycotted #Python #chardet #copywashing. Of course, there's the possibility that some of them are simply out-of-date, though.

So far chardet-7 is distributed by #Chromebrew, #CondaForge (not on Repology), #Homebrew, #KaOS, #OpenIndiana, #openmamba, #Ravenports, #Spack and #T2 SDE. Shame on you!

https://repology.org/project/chardet/versions
https://repology.org/project/python%3Achardet/versions

I thought Malus.sh was a bit of a bad joke. https://web.archive.org/web/20260303054215/https://malus.sh/blog.html But now, Chardet, a tool we actually use, has been "liberated" from LGPL using #VibeCoding tools: https://github.com/chardet/chardet/blob/7.3.0/README.md#whats-new-in-chardet-7

#Malus #LLM #Chardet #FreeSoftware

Most of the discussions about the impact of the latest generative AI systems on copyright have centred on text, images and video. That’s no surprise, since writers, artists and film-makers feel very strongly about their creations, and members of the public can relate easily to the issues that AI raises for this kind of creativity. But there’s another creative domain that has been massively […]

Most of the discussions about the impact of the latest generative AI systems on copyright have centred on text, images and video. That’s no surprise, since writers, artists and film-makers feel very strongly about their creations, and members of the public can relate easily to the issues that AI raises for this kind of creativity. But there’s another creative domain that has been massively […]

Most of the discussions about the impact of the latest generative AI systems on copyright have centred on text, images and video. That’s no surprise, since writers, artists and film-makers feel very strongly about their creations, and members of the public can relate easily to the issues that AI raises for this kind of creativity. But there’s another creative domain that has been massively […]

Most of the discussions about the impact of the latest generative AI systems on copyright have centred on text, images and video. That’s no surprise, since writers, artists and film-makers feel very strongly about their creations, and members of the public can relate easily to the issues that AI raises for this kind of creativity. But there’s another creative domain that has been massively […]

Most of the discussions about the impact of the latest generative AI systems on copyright have centred on text, images and video. That’s no surprise, since writers, artists and film-makers feel very strongly about their creations, and members of the public can relate easily to the issues that AI raises for this kind of creativity. But there’s another creative domain that has been massively […]

"Chardet : quand une IA réécrit un logiciel open source en cinq jours et change sa licence"

#Chardet #OpenSource #LogicielLibre #IntelligenceArtificielle #Licence ...

https://korben.info/chardet-quand-une-ia-reecrit-un-logiciel-open-source-en-cinq-jours-et-change-sa-licence.html

« Porter atteinte au copyleft est un acte grave. Refuser d'accorder à autrui les droits que l'on a soi-même acquis […] est profondément antisocial, quelle que soit la méthode employée. [...] Le logiciel libre repose sur des communautés d'utilisateurs et de développeurs qui soutiennent fermement le copyleft. »

L’IA générative se base sur des techniques prédatrices et néocolonialistes, nouvel exemple.

:blobglare:

https://www.lemondeinformatique.fr/actualites/lireamp-pourquoi-l-ia-menace-les-licences-logicielles-99614.html

#opensource #GenAi #Chardet #enshitification #copyleft

The second liberation: AI is the final frontier of Copyleft

https://www.maffulli.net/2026/03/16/ai-final-frontier-of-copyleft/

“Chardet dispute shows how AI will kill software licensing, argues Bruce Perens”
https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/06/ai_kills_software_licensing/

#Chardet #GenAI #opensource #FLOSS

Let me tell you a parable.

There was a student who was given as assignment of writing an essay. The student found 10 similar essays online. He copied selected bits of different essays. He tediously reworded the result, removed some sentences, added some adjectives and adverbs, shifted some more sentences, added some glue — all with the single-minded goal of covering up the tracks. Eventually, a voluminous essay was complete.

The student has put a lot of effort into this; possibly even more that if he had written it himself. He did learn a bit about essays, though he didn't really practice writing one. He did practice some skills that would be useful in a future bullshit job, though. The essay passes all #plagiarism checks, even though it immediately raises red flags to any human reading it: the sudden style changes, contradictory statements, sentences that don't make much sense in their context. And if he was asked to defend it, he might be in trouble.

So, the student put an effort (though not the right kind of effort), produced a mediocre essay and learned something (though bullshit skills rather than creative skills). Now let's consider a different situation: rather than doing all that himself, the student paid somebody else to do it; and not to *write* an original essay, but to do all the shenanigans described above.

That's precisely what using LLMs is. You tell them to write an essay, so they find and mix random stuff, and produce a mediocre essay. You don't put an effort, you don't learn anything, perhaps you don't even read "your" essay. And it passes all the plagiarism checks.

#AI #LLM #NoAI #NoLLM #chardet

Two #AI-related events over the past week — the #Chardet licensing controversy and legendary computer scientist #DonKnuth's shock over AI helping discover a theorem for a problem he'd not yet solved — demand a reckoning: precisely how creative is AI? https://reviews.ofb.biz/sa1401

#Creativity #Licensing #OpenSource #Python #DonaldKnuth #TAOCP #Claude

The key takeaways from the early part of the #chardet thread (I didn't read beyond the ~30 first comments, I have my limits).

1. People there love cosplaying lawyers. Except when the other side also starts cosplaying lawyers, in which case they suddenly divert to suggesting asking professional lawyers.
2. Almost nobody there is concerned with ethics or morality.
3. There's a lot of GPL haters there. Like, they seem the kind of people who don't really care about licensing at all, just used MIT in their projects because it was cool and they heard something about license incompatibility and now bash at everything that's (L)GPL.
4. People don't get that LLMs are statistical models and can't build anything from the ground up. All they can do is remix, which implies they use existing code for inspiration.
5. The maintainer who did the rewrite is a total asshole, and is perfectly aware of it.

Honestly, I'm truly waiting for the subsidizing to end and companies start charging obscene amounts for the use of LLMs. Of course, the reality is that we're totally fucked. We have a lot of projects that adapted a lot of #slop, and people who are being increasingly addicted to this shit. The moment they can't afford it, we'd be left with lots of broken code nobody wants to maintain.

And I definitely don't want to put my effort into packaging crap if its maintainers don't even bother trying.

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

#AI #LLM #NoAI #NoLLM

I missed the absurd chardet license change story. 🫠

BTW I would pin chardet <7 and avoid using the relicensed version if you want to avoid issues. ⚠️

Quoting Madison Taylor from Nvidia:
"Given the existence of issue #327 chardet v7.0.0 is absolutely toxic." https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/331

#Python #Chardet #License #Version

When you drop the dependency on #chardet over the #AI #slop release… and replace it with your own slop.

https://github.com/binaryornot/binaryornot/blob/main/CHANGELOG/v0.5.0.md

#Python #LLM #NoAI #NoLLM

The Linux Kernel Will Soon Be MIT-Licensed and Copyleft Will Be Dead Within 5 Years https://lowendbox.com/blog/the-linux-kernel-will-soon-be-mit-licensed-and-copyleft-will-be-dead-within-5-years/ #gnupubliclicense #Editorial&News #chardet #python #clang #fsf #gcc #gnu #MIT

One thing in the entire #chardet debacle I haven't really seen addressed:

How could this slop code ever count as a "cleanroom" implementation if the chardet codebase is *part of the fucking training data*?

Like, are people really thinking the Claude training data doesn't contain literally *all* public github repos? :thaenkin:

There is a silver lining to the whole #python #chardet debacle. If it is legal to throw a pile of code at an LLM, and tell it to write a new version of that code that is not a derivative then that gives us a lot of options too.

GPL compatible #ZFS? no problem! #ReactOS from the leaked NT/2k sources? No problem!

Maybe this is a golden age for the collapse of proprietary software after all. If they can do an end run around the #GPL we can do an end run around the #EULA.

#opensource

#Chardet : quand une #IA réécrit un logiciel #opensource #foss en cinq jours et change sa #licence , sans vergogne de #LGPL à #MIT ...
Vide #juridique total...

https://korben.info/chardet-quand-une-ia-reecrit-un-logiciel-open-source-en-cinq-jours-et-change-sa-licence.html

#Chardet : quand une #IA réécrit un logiciel #opensource #foss en cinq jours et change sa #licence , sans vergogne de #LGPL à #MIT ...
Vide #juridique total...

https://korben.info/chardet-quand-une-ia-reecrit-un-logiciel-open-source-en-cinq-jours-et-change-sa-licence.html

#Chardet : quand une #IA réécrit un logiciel #opensource #foss en cinq jours et change sa #licence , sans vergogne de #LGPL à #MIT ...
Vide #juridique total...

https://korben.info/chardet-quand-une-ia-reecrit-un-logiciel-open-source-en-cinq-jours-et-change-sa-licence.html

#Chardet : quand une #IA réécrit un logiciel #opensource #foss en cinq jours et change sa #licence , sans vergogne de #LGPL à #MIT ...
Vide #juridique total...

https://korben.info/chardet-quand-une-ia-reecrit-un-logiciel-open-source-en-cinq-jours-et-change-sa-licence.html

#Chardet : quand une #IA réécrit un logiciel #opensource #foss en cinq jours et change sa #licence , sans vergogne de #LGPL à #MIT ...
Vide #juridique total...

https://korben.info/chardet-quand-une-ia-reecrit-un-logiciel-open-source-en-cinq-jours-et-change-sa-licence.html

#Chardet : quand une #IA réécrit un logiciel #opensource #foss en cinq jours et change sa #licence , sans vergogne de #LGPL à #MIT ... Vide #juridique total... korben.info/chardet-quan...

Chardet : quand une IA réécrit...

#Chardet : quand une #IA réécrit un logiciel #opensource #foss en cinq jours et change sa #licence , sans vergogne de #LGPL à #MIT ... Vide #juridique total... korben.info/chardet-quan...

Chardet : quand une IA réécrit...

I know little about the tedious turf-wars over licensing terms which seems to be a major preoccupation of the "open software" community; I've always been dubious about such wrangling over terms because (to my naïve eyes) it has something of the same delirious and Kafkaesque quality as (say) arguing over whether it's possible to be a "sovereign citizen" with some sufficiently arcane combination of legal maneuvers that will almost certainly not survive a serious court challenge, but which isn't really intended to survive such a challenge. I suppose that the occasional open-source licensing mudfight has occasionally been argued in civil courts (i.e. the separate court system chiefly for wealthy persons' complaints against each other) so the squabbling over this versus that open-source licence isn't completely unreal. I guess. It's just about as real as anything else pertaining to civil law, i.e. it's all part of the same unending bureaucratic nightmare from which Joseph K. and the rest of us seem condemned never to wake.

That was a very long introductory paragraph, wasn't it? Suffice it to say: I don't know one open-source licence from another, but I'm sure someone who was deeply into FOSS legalisms could tell me that there's a VERY important reason why someone would want to play the elaborate trick that Dan Blanchard played with the chardet library. I'm guessing that Blanchard has some ulterior motivations involving commercial monetization of his work that he'll never be totally honest about. I will accept for the purpose of my own blithering that there's a good reason why he did what he did.

I wish only to point out the following: the premise of what he did requires his "AI tool" not to be intelligent. Blanchard did not want an exercise of intelligence. If he had, he would have simply hired someone to do a refactor, applying their intelligence to the matter of how to change things in just such a way as to anticipate the inevitable disputes about whether it was really acceptable to rewrite a code base for the sole purpose of wriggling out from under a particular set of licensing terms. But then he would have to cut this person in on the deal—that's the important thing. A genuinely intelligent henchperson would have needed to be a PEER to Blanchard, someone whose own business interests needed to be accommodated, and that is plainly not what Blanchard wanted. He simply wanted a box that he could put his codebase into, and then with some tinkering and fiddling it would transform his codebase into something unique enough to re-licence, and basically…he didn't want any troublesome thoughts and reflections about what he was doing, which is what inevitably would have happened if he'd involved another person, someone with actual intelligence.

He wanted a witless machine, to do one witless job. And gosh, doesn't that basically sound like what the entire technology sector REALLY wants from "artificial intelligence"?

~Chara of Pnictogen

I know little about the tedious turf-wars over licensing terms which seems to be a major preoccupation of the "open software" community; I've always been dubious about such wrangling over terms because (to my naïve eyes) it has something of the same delirious and Kafkaesque quality as (say) arguing over whether it's possible to be a "sovereign citizen" with some sufficiently arcane combination of legal maneuvers that will almost certainly not survive a serious court challenge, but which isn't really intended to survive such a challenge. I suppose that the occasional open-source licensing mudfight has occasionally been argued in civil courts (i.e. the separate court system chiefly for wealthy persons' complaints against each other) so the squabbling over this versus that open-source licence isn't completely unreal. I guess. It's just about as real as anything else pertaining to civil law, i.e. it's all part of the same unending bureaucratic nightmare from which Joseph K. and the rest of us seem condemned never to wake.

That was a very long introductory paragraph, wasn't it? Suffice it to say: I don't know one open-source licence from another, but I'm sure someone who was deeply into FOSS legalisms could tell me that there's a VERY important reason why someone would want to play the elaborate trick that Dan Blanchard played with the chardet library. I'm guessing that Blanchard has some ulterior motivations involving commercial monetization of his work that he'll never be totally honest about. I will accept for the purpose of my own blithering that there's a good reason why he did what he did.

I wish only to point out the following: the premise of what he did requires his "AI tool" not to be intelligent. Blanchard did not want an exercise of intelligence. If he had, he would have simply hired someone to do a refactor, applying their intelligence to the matter of how to change things in just such a way as to anticipate the inevitable disputes about whether it was really acceptable to rewrite a code base for the sole purpose of wriggling out from under a particular set of licensing terms. But then he would have to cut this person in on the deal—that's the important thing. A genuinely intelligent henchperson would have needed to be a PEER to Blanchard, someone whose own business interests needed to be accommodated, and that is plainly not what Blanchard wanted. He simply wanted a box that he could put his codebase into, and then with some tinkering and fiddling it would transform his codebase into something unique enough to re-licence, and basically…he didn't want any troublesome thoughts and reflections about what he was doing, which is what inevitably would have happened if he'd involved another person, someone with actual intelligence.

He wanted a witless machine, to do one witless job. And gosh, doesn't that basically sound like what the entire technology sector REALLY wants from "artificial intelligence"?

~Chara of Pnictogen

I know little about the tedious turf-wars over licensing terms which seems to be a major preoccupation of the "open software" community; I've always been dubious about such wrangling over terms because (to my naïve eyes) it has something of the same delirious and Kafkaesque quality as (say) arguing over whether it's possible to be a "sovereign citizen" with some sufficiently arcane combination of legal maneuvers that will almost certainly not survive a serious court challenge, but which isn't really intended to survive such a challenge. I suppose that the occasional open-source licensing mudfight has occasionally been argued in civil courts (i.e. the separate court system chiefly for wealthy persons' complaints against each other) so the squabbling over this versus that open-source licence isn't completely unreal. I guess. It's just about as real as anything else pertaining to civil law, i.e. it's all part of the same unending bureaucratic nightmare from which Joseph K. and the rest of us seem condemned never to wake.

That was a very long introductory paragraph, wasn't it? Suffice it to say: I don't know one open-source licence from another, but I'm sure someone who was deeply into FOSS legalisms could tell me that there's a VERY important reason why someone would want to play the elaborate trick that Dan Blanchard played with the chardet library. I'm guessing that Blanchard has some ulterior motivations involving commercial monetization of his work that he'll never be totally honest about. I will accept for the purpose of my own blithering that there's a good reason why he did what he did.

I wish only to point out the following: the premise of what he did requires his "AI tool" not to be intelligent. Blanchard did not want an exercise of intelligence. If he had, he would have simply hired someone to do a refactor, applying their intelligence to the matter of how to change things in just such a way as to anticipate the inevitable disputes about whether it was really acceptable to rewrite a code base for the sole purpose of wriggling out from under a particular set of licensing terms. But then he would have to cut this person in on the deal—that's the important thing. A genuinely intelligent henchperson would have needed to be a PEER to Blanchard, someone whose own business interests needed to be accommodated, and that is plainly not what Blanchard wanted. He simply wanted a box that he could put his codebase into, and then with some tinkering and fiddling it would transform his codebase into something unique enough to re-licence, and basically…he didn't want any troublesome thoughts and reflections about what he was doing, which is what inevitably would have happened if he'd involved another person, someone with actual intelligence.

He wanted a witless machine, to do one witless job. And gosh, doesn't that basically sound like what the entire technology sector REALLY wants from "artificial intelligence"?

~Chara of Pnictogen

I know little about the tedious turf-wars over licensing terms which seems to be a major preoccupation of the "open software" community; I've always been dubious about such wrangling over terms because (to my naïve eyes) it has something of the same delirious and Kafkaesque quality as (say) arguing over whether it's possible to be a "sovereign citizen" with some sufficiently arcane combination of legal maneuvers that will almost certainly not survive a serious court challenge, but which isn't really intended to survive such a challenge. I suppose that the occasional open-source licensing mudfight has occasionally been argued in civil courts (i.e. the separate court system chiefly for wealthy persons' complaints against each other) so the squabbling over this versus that open-source licence isn't completely unreal. I guess. It's just about as real as anything else pertaining to civil law, i.e. it's all part of the same unending bureaucratic nightmare from which Joseph K. and the rest of us seem condemned never to wake.

That was a very long introductory paragraph, wasn't it? Suffice it to say: I don't know one open-source licence from another, but I'm sure someone who was deeply into FOSS legalisms could tell me that there's a VERY important reason why someone would want to play the elaborate trick that Dan Blanchard played with the chardet library. I'm guessing that Blanchard has some ulterior motivations involving commercial monetization of his work that he'll never be totally honest about. I will accept for the purpose of my own blithering that there's a good reason why he did what he did.

I wish only to point out the following: the premise of what he did requires his "AI tool" not to be intelligent. Blanchard did not want an exercise of intelligence. If he had, he would have simply hired someone to do a refactor, applying their intelligence to the matter of how to change things in just such a way as to anticipate the inevitable disputes about whether it was really acceptable to rewrite a code base for the sole purpose of wriggling out from under a particular set of licensing terms. But then he would have to cut this person in on the deal—that's the important thing. A genuinely intelligent henchperson would have needed to be a PEER to Blanchard, someone whose own business interests needed to be accommodated, and that is plainly not what Blanchard wanted. He simply wanted a box that he could put his codebase into, and then with some tinkering and fiddling it would transform his codebase into something unique enough to re-licence, and basically…he didn't want any troublesome thoughts and reflections about what he was doing, which is what inevitably would have happened if he'd involved another person, someone with actual intelligence.

He wanted a witless machine, to do one witless job. And gosh, doesn't that basically sound like what the entire technology sector REALLY wants from "artificial intelligence"?

~Chara of Pnictogen

Can an AI rewrite of a software package be relicensed? It's complex, AND simple.

It may be impossible to prove it's not a derivative work, hence un-relicensable.

However, separately (US) Supreme Court upheld decision that machine generated code does not have copyright. Thus it also can not be licensed, at all.

#chardet #license #copyright

> Did you add "pretend you didn't see the original" to the prompt? lol.

Uh, yes, basically, he actually did exactly that.

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327#issuecomment-4005195078

#chardet

Auf Urheberrechte pfeifende Software von auf Urheberrechte anderer pfeifenden Konzernen pfeift auf Urheberrechte der Community des Verwenders, weil dieser auf Urheberrechte pfeift.

Immerhin konsequent würde ich mal sagen.

#chardet #ai #ki

please "clean room" gmail, lightroom, photoshop and any other spyware/enshittified mess.

Or at least launder us some documentation and user friendly UX. I wouldn't cry too hard...

#llms #chardet #llm

I don't really have a take on the specifics of the chardet thing, but I can formulate my thoughts around opensource.

I want everybody to be able to view the source and _write_ the source of the software they run on their devices. GPL was a way to spread that approach: "i'm putting effort into this, and I can use copyright as a tool to make more software open.".

IMO the meaning of MIT license as "ok cool now i can take community work and not give back except a little (c) at the bottom of a 800 page scrollview" is soon going to be over anyway. You don't like that company X doesn't open up their software? just screenshot it and have the AI make its own version, and show them. More open software and control over your means of computation.

The reason I used to put things under GPL was that: get more people to open up software. Then I realized that this mostly led to shitty half assed clones done internally because opensource was a nogo, and put my stuff under MIT because at least I'd be able to use it at work and others too.

Now I'm like "sure train on my code, what's the worst that can happen? rather my code than some worse 🤣 ", because my goal is to allow more people to use their computers without being reliant on companies or (cough) nerds with no understanding of design.

Copyright was always a shitty tool imo, and it's completely meaningless for software. Which is good. Copyright algorithms and other things that can easily be doublechecked, and require serious effort. For the more pedestrian of us, let us plug stuff together.

#llms #chardet #llm #vibecoding

Maintainer of #chardet, a widely used #Python character encoding detector library, replaces entire existing codebase with #AI-generated code, and changes the license in the process. The original author isn't pleased:

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

#vibecoding #opensource 😱

No right to relicense this project

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

#HackerNews #NoRightToRelicense #ProjectIssues #OpenSourceLicensing #GitHubDiscussion #Chardet

No right to relicense this project

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

#HackerNews #NoRightToRelicense #ProjectIssues #OpenSourceLicensing #GitHubDiscussion #Chardet

No right to relicense this project

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

#HackerNews #NoRightToRelicense #ProjectIssues #OpenSourceLicensing #GitHubDiscussion #Chardet

No right to relicense this project

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

#HackerNews #NoRightToRelicense #ProjectIssues #OpenSourceLicensing #GitHubDiscussion #Chardet

No right to relicense this project

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

#HackerNews #NoRightToRelicense #ProjectIssues #OpenSourceLicensing #GitHubDiscussion #Chardet