this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
208 points (100.0% liked)
Opensource
6160 readers
35 users here now
A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!
⠀
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think he's unhappy because that developer presents the macOS port as though it were an official port, even using the original developer's biography to market it, when it isn't.
Trademark is one of the areas of copyright law that makes sense. The dev for notepad++ could receive tickets when the app doesn't work, fines or blocks if there is any violation of apple TOS or just confusion in the apple market if they ever wanted to move into OSX.
The funny part is, it sounds like he could have been successful, but it sounds like his prompting for the port omitted a lot of important things to consider. He may have just done "make this run on a Mac". I think if he had mentioned it was a port, one of the major LLMs would have known to change enough about it to make it different and avoid this.
no. LLMs wouldn't have done that for simply saying "I want a port of this fork for macos" they wouldn't have changed the branding or anything. You would have to specifically put in the prompt how you would want a rebrand, specifically state HOW you wanted to rebrand it and where, etc.
The prompt was likely simply "make this work on macos" and that's it.