[inigyou]

See also: why friends don't let friends use permissive software licenses.

The llama.cpp authorized ollama to do this... Unintentionally.

[msm_]

Literally the main point of this blog post:

>The project’s binary distributions didn’t include the required MIT license notice for the llama.cpp code they were shipping. This isn’t a matter of open-source etiquette, the MIT license has exactly one major requirement: include the copyright notice. Ollama didn’t.

[inigyou]

How sure are we that it didn't include the notice? There isn't any prescribed form or location for the notice, so you're trying to prove a negative.