3 月 11 日，腾讯上线了一个 AI 技能平台 SkillHub 。 （ skillhub 在页脚标注了来源 clawhub.ai ） 1、OpenClaw 之父指责抄袭 12 日上午 10:56，有网友在推特上@ 提醒龙虾之父 Peter Steinberger，问他是否了解腾讯抓取了 ClawHub 整站 内容。 11:03 分，Peter 回应表示曾经收到过一些邮件，有人抱怨他限速导致抓取数据的速度不够快。他们抄袭，却不 以任何方式支持该项目。 随后他还@ 腾讯混元账号表示，爬网站导致服务器成本上升到 5 位数了，不如出手帮帮忙。 网友们纷纷指责腾讯，"这很腾讯"。 2、腾讯回应 在 12:32 分，腾讯官号回应表示：SkillHub 是 本地镜像站 ，已明确标注来源。上线首周处理 87 万次下载、 180GB 流量，仅从官方源拉取 1GB 数据。团队许多成员是 OpenClaw 代码贡献者， 愿意成为赞助商支持生态 面对腾讯的回应，有网友吐槽"你倒是赞助啊"，也有的说"腾讯云捐服务器吧"。当然了，更多的是骂声…… 。 Peter 后续则强调： 合规不代表合情，礼貌的做法是先问一声 。 3、常规做法 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ethical implications and developer rights surrounding open-source projects, particularly focusing on the experience of developer Philip Laine with Microsoft, which allegedly borrowed from his open-source project Spegel without proper attribution [1][16]. Group 1: Background of the Project - Philip Laine developed Spegel, a stateless local OCI registry mirror system, to address issues with image repository service interruptions that affected Kubernetes clusters [4][5]. - The project was initiated after a significant outage of GitHub's container image repository, which highlighted the need for a more reliable solution [4]. Group 2: Interaction with Microsoft - Microsoft reached out to Philip for discussions about the Spegel project, leading to initial optimism about potential collaboration [7]. - However, communication from Microsoft dwindled over time, leaving Philip uncertain about the company's commitment [7]. Group 3: Discovery of Code Borrowing - At KubeCon, Philip discovered that his project Spegel was referenced in a Microsoft presentation, which led to the revelation of Microsoft's new project, Peerd, that appeared to borrow heavily from Spegel [8][9]. - Upon reviewing Peerd's code, Philip found familiar function signatures and comments that closely resembled his own work, raising concerns about proper attribution [9][11]. Group 4: Licensing and Ethical Concerns - Spegel is licensed under the MIT license, which allows for forking and modification but does not permit misrepresentation of authorship [11]. - Philip expressed frustration that Peerd's development seemed to disregard the original source of inspiration, leading to confusion among users regarding the relationship between the two projects [14]. Group 5: Community and Industry Reactions - The incident sparked discussions within the developer community about the challenges faced by independent maintainers when large corporations engage with open-source projects [17][18]. - Microsoft acknowledged the oversight in attribution and committed to improving their processes for open-source contributions [21].