You know we were under the opinion, wrongly, that we were able to use that code after discussing it with RHavar.
This is absolutely ridiculous of you to drag me into this. I neither said nor implied any such thing. I would normally be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest maybe you misunderstood me, but we only spoke about it after you launched with pirated software.
But I do encourage you to share anything I said that might have given you a different impression. Just make sure you include enough context, like how you first started off with "we didn't just copy it but used reference" before then later admitting you were using a minified verbatim copy of bustabit (even including some pointless bustabit debug lines) both on the client and server, and asked about known problems or exploits in the specific version you're running. So there goes the "accidental infringement" defence. Ooops.
But reviewing our conversation, my advice was to follow the terms of the AGPLv3 version (releasing modified source code) and save you paying the small licensing fee. So please don't act like you were led astray (and not to mention: I'm not a lawyer or have any rights to the source code you're using) so my opinion is rather irrelevant anyway.
Quote
There is not any Bustabit code in the relaunched version and we even use different libraries for graphing.
That's obviously nonsense. Let's not pretend you reimplemented the entire thing in a couple days. It's exactly the same and has literally exactly the same rendering quirks and bugs that it did before. I can see you made a few obvious changes (stripped the debug lines, changed