github-starred/ollama
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/ollama/ollama.git synced 2026-07-15 12:48:05 -05:00
Code Issues 16.9k Packages Projects Releases 122 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #11634] Clarify license of the new ollama app #85374

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-05-09 23:31:59 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 4 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-09 23:31:59 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @bezo97 on GitHub (Aug 1, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/11634

Hi, please help me understand the licensing of the newly introduced ollama app.

As I understand, this new gui app is not part of the open-source MIT licensed ollama repo and I cannot find any other license nowhere on the website or during the installation or in the files, which is concerning.
Image
I'll list my concerns regarding the case:

  • The license of the new ollama app is not clear / non-existent. If the app intended to be part of the open-source repo, please publish it. Otherwise please include a new EULA in its installer.
  • On the website it's not clear to the user that they are downloading a different software to what's advertised with the github link next to the download. Please make it more obvious that only the CLI is MIT licensed and the new app is a different software.
  • It doesn't help the case that the two softwares are both branded as "ollama" which only adds to the ambiguity

Thank you for the response in advance

Originally created by @bezo97 on GitHub (Aug 1, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/11634 Hi, please help me understand the licensing of the newly introduced [ollama app](https://ollama.com/blog/new-app). As I understand, this new gui app is not part of the open-source MIT licensed ollama repo and I cannot find any other license nowhere on the website or during the installation or in the files, which is concerning. <img width="178" height="168" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1751f600-6aa3-4f2c-a8f4-f6d93e4a5de9" /> I'll list my concerns regarding the case: - The license of the new ollama app is not clear / non-existent. If the app intended to be part of the open-source repo, please publish it. Otherwise please include a new EULA in its installer. - On the website it's not clear to the user that they are downloading a different software to what's advertised with the github link next to the download. Please make it more obvious that only the CLI is MIT licensed and the new app is a different software. - It doesn't help the case that the two softwares are both branded as "ollama" which only adds to the ambiguity Thank you for the response in advance
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-09 23:32:04 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@malisipi commented on GitHub (Aug 3, 2025):

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I am just reporting a potential license issue

Also it seems the new application is looking like dependent a AGPL-3.0 library.

You can see the link in virustotal screenshot (https://github.com/fumiama/go-docx). And on GitHub, it's looking like it's licensed by AGPL-3.0 license.

I think this issue should be clarified.

https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/9c11ad1a57549f960198a5b078d383ed54c3abedd9a0151cc76310e47c5410d5/details

Image Image
<!-- gh-comment-id:3148569316 --> @malisipi commented on GitHub (Aug 3, 2025): _Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I am just reporting a potential license issue_ Also it seems the new application is looking like dependent a AGPL-3.0 library. You can see the link in virustotal screenshot (https://github.com/fumiama/go-docx). And on GitHub, it's looking like it's licensed by AGPL-3.0 license. I think this issue should be clarified. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/9c11ad1a57549f960198a5b078d383ed54c3abedd9a0151cc76310e47c5410d5/details <img width="743" height="526" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/103c225d-22d6-4124-9c30-dc6c5bede086" /> <img width="1266" height="575" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c3595a2d-c6ae-45c9-8d24-aa0222362f0a" />
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-09 23:32:04 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bezo97 commented on GitHub (Aug 9, 2025):

Hi, small update

  • The Github link has been removed from next to the Download button on the landing page, which I think is a step in the good direction 👍
  • I'm adding a new concern to my list. It looks like the open repo's Releases page contain unlicensed software, which originates from a private repo according to the pipeline. Specifically I'm talking about the installer exe. I'm not sure whether this is against the Github TOS, but my suggestion is to avoid distributing unlicensed software in the MIT licensed repo's Readme and Releases page, which now deceives not only users but unobservant developers too.

I'd appreciate an official head-nod from maintainers that the issue is not being ignored (tagging @jmorganca for visibility). I really believe that transparent communication about this matter is a must. Looking forward for a response, thanks in advance

<!-- gh-comment-id:3172110478 --> @bezo97 commented on GitHub (Aug 9, 2025): Hi, small update - The Github link has been removed from next to the Download button on the landing page, which I think is a step in the good direction 👍 - I'm adding a new concern to my list. It looks like the open repo's Releases page contain unlicensed software, which originates from a private repo according to the [pipeline](https://github.com/ollama/ollama/blob/main/.github/workflows/release.yaml#L382). Specifically I'm talking about the installer exe. I'm not sure whether this is against the Github TOS, but my suggestion is to avoid distributing unlicensed software in the MIT licensed repo's Readme and Releases page, which now deceives not only users but unobservant developers too. I'd appreciate an official head-nod from maintainers that the issue is not being ignored (tagging @jmorganca for visibility). I really believe that transparent communication about this matter is a must. Looking forward for a response, thanks in advance
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-09 23:32:05 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@GhostDog98 commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2025):

So for some fun RE work:
Downloadable (installer) exe is written with Inno Setup (I wonder if this breaks the clause about All redistributions in binary form must retain all occurrences of the above copyright notice? Probably not...).
Additionally, the installer itself has a LegalCopyright field. (004cf842). This has been left blank:

Image

The base app binary is written entirely in go (1.24.3), which means it should be easy to decompile.

I found the following interesting factors:

  • It uses TheTitanRains w32 library, but DOES NOT include the required copyright licesnse for it. See address 14050303b in ghidra for a char of 987 length containing this string and the ones below.
  • It uses ledongthuc pdf library (https://github.com/ledongthuc/pdf) but contains no copyright notice for it.
  • It uses mattn gosqlite3 library, and has no copyright notice for it.
  • It uses googles UUID library (https://github.com/google/uuid)

Fun fact: As there wasnt any eula prohibiting it, technically I'm allowed to decompile it lol

<!-- gh-comment-id:3177386771 --> @GhostDog98 commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2025): So for some fun RE work: Downloadable (installer) exe is written with Inno Setup (I wonder if this breaks the clause about `All redistributions in binary form must retain all occurrences of the above copyright notice`? Probably not...). Additionally, the installer itself has a LegalCopyright field. (004cf842). This has been left blank: <img width="660" height="105" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2448e5a5-61ff-4ee2-9ccd-9bd7565a0e9a" /> The base app binary is written entirely in go (1.24.3), which means it should be easy to decompile. I found the following interesting factors: - It uses TheTitanRains [w32 library](https://github.com/TheTitanrain/w32), but DOES NOT include the required copyright licesnse for it. See address 14050303b in ghidra for a char of 987 length containing this string and the ones below. - It uses ledongthuc pdf library (https://github.com/ledongthuc/pdf) but contains no copyright notice for it. - It uses mattn gosqlite3 library, and has no copyright notice for it. - It uses googles UUID library (https://github.com/google/uuid) Fun fact: As there wasnt any eula prohibiting it, technically I'm allowed to decompile it lol
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-09 23:32:05 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Igorgro commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2025):

https://github.com/ollama/ollama/pull/12933

<!-- gh-comment-id:3488130986 --> @Igorgro commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2025): https://github.com/ollama/ollama/pull/12933
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
amd
api
app
bug
build
cli
cloud
compatibility
context-length
create
docker
documentation
embeddings
feature request
feedback wanted
good first issue
gpt-oss
gpu
harmony
help wanted
image
install
intel
js
launch
linux
macos
memory
mlx
model
needs more info
networking
nvidia
ollama.com
performance
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 python
question
registry
rendering
thinking
tools
top
vulkan
windows
wsl
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/ollama#85374
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?