So far, it seems:
OP made a patch, it was bricking a system and was told to fix it, but was slow to submit a fix. Leah then got the board, made her own patch, and then tested it without any bricks. OP is still listed in the credits. https://libreboot.org/contrib.html#lorenzo-aloe
I'm sorry to hear about this, do you have some links to your GitHub and the interactions?
EDIT: I checked Leah's Mastodon, found this interaction: https://files.catbox.moe/6dftac.png https://mas.to/@libreleah/111997718668105706 And here's the IRC interaction: https://av.vimuser.org/lorenzo.txt
https://libreboot.org/contrib.html#lorenzo-aloe
I haven't taken the time to read all of this fully, simply trying to share info that is not supplied by either parties.
EDIT: Taking more time to read it, it seems so far:
OP's code was buggy and bricking boards. Leah requested a patch to solve the known problems. OP took too long, and when Leah got a personal copy of the same computer/board, she worked on her patch and implemented it. OP is still listed on the site. https://libreboot.org/contrib.html#lorenzo-aloe
Provided hardware testing for the Dell OptiPlex 9020, also provided testing for proxmox with GPU passthrough on Dell Precision T1650, confirming near-native performance; with this, you can boot operating systems virtually natively, performance-wise, on a Libreboot system in cases where that OS is not natively supported.
All round good guy, an honest and loyal fan.
I personally have not written any code nor submitted anything to Libreboot, but it seems OP is still credited despite the claims of being stolen. I can't confirm if any code was used by OP or if Leah used 100% original code, as that's not my expertise. And even then, I'm not sure if the GPL/whatever license Libreboot uses is cool or uncool on that.
I can count on one hand how many times someone's creative endeavors that when aired/sold to a network went back to them. I can't begin to tell you how many times someone has a 100% original idea, a network funded it, aired it at such a bad time or had such bad ad campaign for it, it failed.
Then the network claims it as a tax write off so it never gets aired again, and no DVD/Blu-Ray sales are allowed. And the artists who worked on it can't get any rights to what they made. Because a company somewhere couldn't make money with the idea, now no one can. Even the inventor.
Animation is among the more common ones to have this happen to.
That's way more work that I'm thinking of, plus my home internet isn't good enough for any outside server use, and I don't have the cash for a server hosted somewhere. Thank you however!
Right, this is for my friends that I have consent/approval from. I also don't punch random bank info in public, and rarely do it on their computers.
A Vanta review? Crazy! Love the branching out of your content/style.
I honestly detest those kinds of names. It is so... wild. And that's me coming from magic the gathering and yugioh where we get exclaim random card games with joy and fun rage.
So the landlord will use the money from the rent to personally hand repair that furniture himself, right? He won't just jack up the price and hire a cheap fixture repair place, right?
Literally walk onto the floor and go "I'm smoking that Shadow Garden Dark Evil pack." Just go full blown into the meme.
Cool! Now are we gonna get any laws to prohibit this national security threat? Maybe ban shady donations from billionaires both American and abroad? Because if we just ban Putin from donating directly, they can just make a shell company in New York and fund him.
We're going to get the laws put into place to stop this, right? Anything to stop Trump from getting into the office again?
Free software != free of charge.
Nothing about free software says you need to give it away for no cost, nor that anyone can't do it. You can charge $100 for a simple calculator program that is under the GPL for its code. Nothing is there to prevent you from assembling the code and making it yourself, or from the buyer from copying and sharing the program. It's just way way easier to show off the program for free as in price and freedom for most programmers.
It's why the people who made Debian/Slackware/Ubuntu discs could charge money for an otherwise free product. Because the programmers openly allow this.
And programming is itself labor, just a lot of free software devs don't worry too much about getting paid for it.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
Except for one special situation, the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) has no requirements about how much you can charge for distributing a copy of free software. You can charge nothing, a penny, a dollar, or a billion dollars. It's up to you, and the marketplace, so don't complain to us if nobody wants to pay a billion dollars for a copy.
The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed without the corresponding complete source code. Those who do this are required by the GNU GPL to provide source code on subsequent request. Without a limit on the fee for the source code, they would be able set a fee too large for anyone to pay—such as a billion dollars—and thus pretend to release source code while in truth concealing it. So in this case we have to limit the fee for source in order to ensure the user's freedom. In ordinary situations, however, there is no such justification for limiting distribution fees, so we do not limit them.
Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line stated in the GNU GPL plead for permission, saying that they “won't charge money for the GNU software” or such like. That won't get them anywhere with us. Free software is about freedom, and enforcing the GPL is defending freedom. When we defend users' freedom, we are not distracted by side issues such as how much of a distribution fee is charged. Freedom is the issue, the whole issue, and the only issue.
Torrenting stuff that is public domain or intended by its creators to be shared via BitTorrent isn't illegal. You won't get busted for sharing a Linux ISO or a copy of Moby Dick.
You would get in trouble for media made in or after 1929 (currently). A VPN would help to protect you from being caught for this, but you would most likely never get arrested for downloading, only being a major player in a scene.
And why cops don't stop them? They do. There's laws on books that prohibit them, but in (a lot) of countries, they either don't have a law that stops VPNs, only piracy sites, or simply don't have the time to care about media piracy when there's bigger fish to fry.