You all noted that this project is entirely closed source. Something was stated about the UI, but that's wholly irrelevant since the entirety of the project is closed source.
Your project integrates the use of the Tor Network and likely interacts with the network using required libraries and code that was originally published by the Tor Network.
Here's a copy of the license for the Tor source code: https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/LICENSE?id=272265efbd89c4c2589316a20cf27064def21911
Its licensed under "3-Clause BSD", which you can read in full here: https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause
Since your project appears to integrate code from Tor in some facet, this license should've been included here along with whatever source code applies that falls under this license. If you visit the link I gave for the Tor license, you'll notice that as you scroll down, there are additional licenses for other software, packages and programs that were compiled and integrated into the Tor source code.
That was done because those that published the Tor source respect the license requirements of the technology they used in order to build their project.
The World is Bigger Than You
I understand that you all are worried about your project being forked / idea being "stolen". However, it would help to have enough self-awareness to acknowledge that your project would have been impossible to create if Tor was also closed source. Fortunately for us all, it isn't.
Having a closed source project is no problem. I'm typing this issue from a MacBook and Apple certainly has no qualms about making it clear their code is proprietary and the source is closed. However, they do publish the source code for the open source programs, code, etc., they use in the creation of their products (i.e., iPhone, MacBook, etc.).
You can view all the source code from open source projects that Apple uses in their products here: https://opensource.apple.com/releases/
Why This Issue is Being Created
Because you all took the time to create a repo on GitHub for your project explaining why you closed source all of the code you used in its creation and were even audacious enough to publish your license up here with what one could assume were expectations that said license would be observed and respected by others.
Yet, ironically, you failed to do the same despite creating a project that essentially is built entirely on the basis of an open source project. Again, the issue is not being closed source. Its using open source with a complete lack of regard and respect to the associated licenses that accompany those projects while simultaneously creating a GitHub repo that's essentially dedicated to establishing your license rights.
This issue is bigger than open source or licensing. Its a matter of reciprocation and fairness. That's how we all can coexist cohesively.
Thank you in advance for taking the time to review this issue. Whether or not you all decide to take action is up to you. There are no impending consequences for your failure to do so. At least not from anyone other than yourselves.
Few parting thoughts:
- While confidence is awesome (and even necessary) for developers and stakeholders in new projects, its highly presumptuous to suggest that folks will fork & copy your project en masse. You all have obtained no critical acclaim yet or generalized success to where this should be considered a valid concern.
- Developers have always had this fear that their projects being open source will lead to clones. This fear is not baseless but its also not what developers actually fear - and that's the idea that their original idea will be diluted by the proliferation of cheap imitations. Or, worse yet, that a true competitor with much greater resource may stumble upon their idea, fork it and bring it to market quicker than they can, which would allow that competitor to reap all the spoils of success that your team originally envisioned would go to them. This doesn't happen. Almost ever. Take a look at that list of open source projects Apple provided source code references for. Its pretty extensive. Why? Because there's really no reason to fork something if the original iteration is well-designed and maintained.
- Developers also have the idea that making their projects open source will simultaneously destroy all monetization strategies / business models. The fact is this couldn't be further from the truth. There are trade-offs that come with the decision, but in my opinion those trade offs suggest that it may be more profitable to open source one's project. The major benefit you get here is that you open your project up to contributions from the community, which essentially can amount to receiving expert assistance for free. Also, if you price your product appropriately, the convenience of paying $x/month will exceed the benefit someone may receive from averting this cost & deciding to download, compile, build & install your project. Take MullvadVPN for example. All of their code is open source yet they still are profitable as a business. How? Because nobody really wants to build their own VPN and its even more tedious to fork and modify the source code to the extent necessary for one to deem their version as an improvement. Keep in mind that those w the skills & expertise to do something like this are likely already deploying those skills elsewhere.
That's all I got to say! Good luck with everything guys. Just some food for thought.
React
Typescript
Django
Laravel
Facebook
Microsoft
Google
Alibaba
D3
Tencent