The creator of FairScan, an open-source document scanner, has publicly accused Ente Locker of copying its image processing code without proper attribution. In a blog post published on October 12, 2026, the developer detailed a timeline starting September 16, when an Ente engineer emailed them to announce that the new Locker app used FairScan’s segmentation model. The original communication claimed Ente had written the surrounding image processing "from scratch," a statement the FairScan author disputes after reviewing the code.

The Dispute Over "Standard" Methods

Upon inspecting the Ente Locker repository, the FairScan developer found multiple implementations that appeared to be direct translations from Kotlin to Rust. The similarities included identical overall structures, algorithms, function names, variable names, and hard-coded values. When the developer sent a list of comparisons to Ente on September 17, an engineer replied that their blog post "could have been better phrased." By September 21, the engineer characterized the code as "fairly standard image-processing methods" and noted a subsequent pull request that rewrote over 6,000 lines of code, though this change did not affect the version distributed in Locker 1.0.9.

Questions of GPL Compliance and Silence

The core issue extends beyond mere similarity to potential license violations. If Ente’s code is derived from FairScan in a way that triggers the GNU General Public License (GPL), its distribution raises significant compliance questions. Despite sending a formal email to copyright@ente.com on September 21, the FairScan author reported no response as of October 12. The developer expressed frustration that Ente widely promoted the feature on social media, with CEO Harsh Agrawal calling it the "Best opensource document scanner I've ever used," while ignoring private inquiries about the code's origins.

The Erosion of Trust in Open Source

This incident has prompted the FairScan author to reevaluate the ethos of open-source collaboration. While they initially accepted the risk of code reuse, they did not anticipate that another open-source project would copy code without honest acknowledgment. The developer noted that seeing their work dismissed as "standard" when it involved unique algorithmic choices—such as approximating a quad based on contour orientation—felt disrespectful. The lack of public reaction to their initial Mastodon post has further discouraged them, leading to questions about whether open-source transparency actually guarantees accountability.

Key Takeaways

  • Ente Locker initially claimed its image processing was written from scratch, a statement later reworded after scrutiny.
  • The FairScan author documented direct translations of algorithms, variable names, and hard-coded values from Kotlin to Rust.
  • A massive 6,000-line rewrite occurred shortly after the allegations, but the distributed version remains under question.
  • The dispute highlights the practical difficulties of enforcing GPL compliance between open-source projects.

The Bottom Line

Copying code is a risk every open-source maintainer accepts, but failing to attribute it while claiming originality is a betrayal of the community's trust. License compliance is not just a legal technicality; it is the social contract that keeps the open-source ecosystem functioning. When a project claims 'from scratch' while mirroring your variable names, it’s not just a bug—it’s a credibility crisis.