Our only modification part is that, if the Software (or any derivative works thereof) is used for any of your commercial products or services that have more than 100 million monthly active users, or more than 20 million US dollars (or equivalent in other currencies) in monthly revenue, you shall prominently display "Kimi K2.5" on the user interface of such product or service.
But at least the rumor mill has them significantly above that line:
> Revenue: As of March 2026, reports suggest Cursor has surpassed $2 billion in annualized revenue (ARR).
Anyway, if it was clear cut, it shouldn't be difficult to get it approved.
These kinds of discussions show why it's a pain to use non standard licenses.
You can't just add random terms to an existing license and use its name. "Modified MIT: Like MIT but pay us 50 million dollars."
Perhaps CC-BY would've been more appropriate.
“ CC-BY 4.0 Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
This license requires that reusers give credit to the creator. It allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, even for commercial purposes.
BY Credit must be given to you, the creator. ”
it's annoying the open source term is being cargo-culted around and I hate to say it but that ship looks like it has sailed.
funny that free software people were infuriated by the open source term and now the open source term is being completely misused in another context
Also, even if it were not for the OSI, this still wouldn't be open source. Because there's no source code available. It's open-weight, which is a different thing. The models weights are, essentially, the "compiled" output. The input and algorithms, we don't know.
It's definitely not what Kimi wanted, but it sounds like this is what is written.