Facts about sing-box violating copyright agreement

[ghost]

In the blog post https://sekai.icu/posts/the-myth-of-xtls/ by nekohasekai, the author of sing-box, there is such a description:

换句话说，该协议不仅复杂且未定义，而且对于反审查目的也毫无意义。

This sentence actually admits that the xtls-rprx-vision protocol does not have a standardized definition, and all definitions of xtls-rprx-vision are derivative files in the source code of xtls. The only official implementation of xtls is in xray-core, which is authorized by the MPL2.0 agreement, and MPL2.0 stipulates that any modification to its files must be open sourced under MPL2.0.

This means that all other implementations of xtls-rprx-vision actually refer to the relevant code of xray-core, and according to the provisions of the MPL2.0 agreement, the relevant files must be open sourced under MPL2.0.

In the built-in vless of sing-box, built-in support for xtls-rprx-vision is included.

https://github.com/SagerNet/sing-box/blob/dev-next/docs/configuration/inbound/vless.zh.md

According to the copyright agreement, this part of the code should be open sourced under MPL2.0, but the copyright agreement of sing-box is not MPL2.0, and there is no relevant copyright statement.

@RPRX @yuhan6665 I hope you will pay attention.