We have a new controversy: “NEXT Teknofest Social”

The platform, which has rapidly become popular as a local alternative to global services like X (formerly Twitter), positions itself as ad-free, privacy-focused, and free from personalized algorithmic feeds. Its standout feature is the integration of T3 AI, a Turkish-developed large language model that users can interact with directly in their posts12.

This launch follows intense public debate fueled by another controversy: Elon Musk’s Grok AI, which faced serious backlash in Turkey after issuing vulgar and insulting statements targeting President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, his late mother, and other revered figures like Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and religious icons. These AI-generated posts led to calls for access restrictions and increased government scrutiny over imported AI chatbots2.

In the wake of the Grok scandal, the Turkish government emphasized the need for “ethical AI” and safe online environments, which Next Teknofest Sosyal claims to provide via its home-grown T3 AI assistant. However, as the platform gains traction, some observers have voiced concerns about:

• Potential over-moderation of political and critical content on the new domestic platform.

• Whether the “ethical AI” framework could stifle dissent or reinforce prevailing political narratives, given its ties to state-backed organizations.

• The implications for digital freedoms as more Turkish users migrate to tightly regulated domestic platforms in response to international AI controversies21.

In summary, the Next Teknofest Sosyal controversy isn’t about a specific incident on the new platform yet, but rather about its positioning in response to ongoing debates over political speech, AI bias, and the Turkish government’s desire for national control over digital and AI spaces following the Grok episode. The broader social discussion focuses on the balance between promoting local tech innovation, ensuring ethical standards, and preserving digital freedoms in the Turkish internet ecosystem21.

Mastodon or not?

The allegations surrounding Selçuk Bayraktar’s new social media platform, NEXT Teknofest Social (referred to as “Next Sosyal”), claim that it was built using the open-source software Mastodon without properly adhering to its licensing requirements. Below is a comprehensive overview of the viewpoints and allegations based on available information, focusing on the claim that Bayraktar “stole” Mastodon’s source code, with clarifications on the legal and ethical context.

Allegations of “Stealing” Mastodon’s Source Code

The claim that Bayraktar “stole” Mastodon’s source code stems from how NEXT Teknofest Social handled its use of Mastodon’s open-source software. Here are the key points and viewpoints:

1. Allegation of Non-Compliance with AGPLv3 License:

– Claim: Mastodon’s AGPLv3 license requires any platform using its code to make the source code, including modifications, publicly accessible and to provide proper attribution to Mastodon. Critics allege that NEXT Teknofest Social failed to fully comply with these terms by not initially sharing its source code or adequately crediting Mastodon in its user interface and website.
– Mastodon’s Response: On July 2025, Mastodon’s official X account publicly tagged Bayraktar, stating, “Hello, please get in touch with us via direct messages,” indicating an attempt to address licensing concerns. Mastodon’s Communications Lead, Andy Piper, told T24 that they had been trying to contact NEXT’s team for weeks without success via email, prompting the public outreach on X. Piper noted that Mastodon’s code and copyright attributions were largely removed from NEXT’s interface and that the mobile apps appeared to rely on Mastodon’s code without proper acknowledgment.
– Specific Issues:
– The “About” page of NEXT’s website (social.teknofest.app) included Mastodon’s license at the bottom but allegedly omitted broader attributions in the user interface.
– Menus and features (e.g., Compose, QR code, OAuth pages) were reportedly identical to Mastodon’s, with minimal changes, such as replacing “Mastodon” with “Teknofest Social” in some text.
– Mastodon expressed concern that NEXT’s source code was not made publicly available as required, which Piper emphasized as a key licensing violation.

1. Bayraktar’s Acknowledgment of Mastodon:

– Defense: Bayraktar did acknowledge NEXT’s Mastodon foundation in a July 4, 2025, X post, stating the platform was “Mastodon-based.” This counters claims that he entirely hid the use of Mastodon’s code. However, critics argue that this acknowledgment was insufficient, as it was not reflected prominently across the platform’s interface or website until the issue became public.
– Post-Controversy Actions: After Mastodon’s public message, NEXT reportedly began adding Mastodon attributions to its website, but Piper noted that full compliance (e.g., publishing the modified source code) was still pending as of July 31, 2025. Mastodon is awaiting NEXT’s full source code release to ensure AGPLv3 compliance.

1. “Stealing” vs. Licensing Misuse:

– Clarification: The term “stole” is misleading in the context of open-source software like Mastodon, which is freely available for use under the AGPLv3 license. The issue is not theft of proprietary code but rather non-compliance with the license’s requirements for transparency and attribution. Anyone can use Mastodon’s code, as seen with platforms like Gab and Truth Social, but they must share their modifications and credit Mastodon.
– Public Perception: Some Turkish media and commentators criticized Bayraktar for presenting NEXT as “yerli ve milli” while relying on foreign open-source software, arguing it misrepresented the platform’s originality. Others, like columnist Ersan Ergür, defended Bayraktar, noting that using English terms like “Next” aligns with global tech naming conventions (e.g., Trump’s Truth Social) and that his track record with indigenous technologies (e.g., Bayraktar drones) supports his credibility.

1. Comparisons to Past Incidents:

– Truth Social Precedent: In 2021, Donald Trump’s Truth Social faced similar allegations for using Mastodon’s code without proper attribution or source code sharing. Mastodon issued a 30-day ultimatum, and Truth Social complied by adding an “open source” section with a ZIP archive of Mastodon’s code, avoiding legal action. This case is often cited in discussions about NEXT, suggesting a pattern where high-profile figures use Mastodon’s code but initially fail to meet licensing obligations.
– Gab’s Use: In 2019, the far-right platform Gab also adopted Mastodon’s code. Unlike Truth Social and NEXT, Gab faced fewer licensing issues because it complied with AGPLv3 terms, but it sparked debate within Mastodon’s community due to its controversial user base.

1. Technical Observations:

– Technology strategist Füsun Sarp Nebil noted that NEXT’s server (social.teknofest.app) is part of Mastodon’s federated network, allowing users to log in using Mastodon apps by selecting the Teknofest Social server. This confirms NEXT’s integration with Mastodon’s infrastructure but also highlights its failure to fully disclose modifications or attributions initially.
– The platform’s interface, including menus and OAuth pages, was described as nearly identical to Mastodon’s, with only minor cosmetic changes, reinforcing claims of heavy reliance on Mastodon’s codebase.

I have asked the Grok to summarize viewpoints on X If the sources are not visible, here is the original link to check the sources

Viewpoints on the Allegations

• Critics’ Perspective:
• Misrepresentation: Some argue that Bayraktar’s “yerli ve milli” branding was deceptive, as NEXT heavily relies on Mastodon, a German-developed, open-source platform. This sparked debates about what constitutes a “national” product when using global open-source software.
• Licensing Violation: Mastodon and commentators like Andy Piper and Eray Özer (T24) emphasize that NEXT’s failure to share its source code and provide full attribution violates AGPLv3, undermining the open-source community’s principles of transparency and collaboration.
• Negligence: Some speculate that NEXT’s team may have overlooked Mastodon’s emails or underestimated the importance of licensing compliance, leading to the public controversy. Özer suggested that responding to Mastodon’s outreach earlier could have avoided the issue.

• Supporters’ Perspective:

• Legitimate Use: Defenders argue that using Mastodon’s open-source code is standard practice and not theft, as anyone can build on it with proper compliance. Bayraktar’s July 4 acknowledgment shows he did not intend to hide Mastodon’s role entirely.
• National Pride: Supporters like Ersan Ergür frame NEXT as a strategic move to reduce reliance on foreign platforms like X, especially given security concerns (e.g., targeting of military personnel via social media). They argue that the “yerli ve milli” label reflects the platform’s Turkish development team and AI integration (T3 AI), not necessarily the codebase’s origin.

• Global Context: Some note that using English names and open-source software aligns with global tech trends, citing examples like Trump’s Truth Social, which also used Mastodon. They argue that criticizing NEXT for this is unfair given Bayraktar’s proven track record in indigenous tech.

• Mastodon’s Stance:

• Mastodon’s primary concern is ensuring AGPLv3 compliance, not prohibiting NEXT’s use of its code. They are waiting for NEXT to publish its full source code and include proper attributions across all interfaces. The public outreach on X was a last resort after failed email attempts, indicating a desire to resolve the issue collaboratively rather than through legal action.

Is It “Stealing”?

• Legal Perspective: The accusation of “stealing” is inaccurate, as Mastodon’s code is freely available under AGPLv3. The issue is about licensing violations—specifically, failing to share modified source code and provide adequate attribution. Non-compliance could lead to legal consequences, such as losing the right to use Mastodon’s code, as seen in the Truth Social case.
• Ethical Perspective: Critics argue that presenting NEXT as a fully “national” product while downplaying Mastodon’s role is misleading and undermines the open-source ethos of giving credit to original developers. However, Bayraktar’s partial acknowledgment suggests oversight rather than intentional deceit.
• Resolution Path: Mastodon has not threatened legal action explicitly but is pressing for compliance. If NEXT publishes its source code and adds proper attributions, the issue could be resolved without escalating, similar to how Truth Social addressed its violation.

Current Status (as of July 31, 2025)

• Mastodon is awaiting NEXT’s full compliance with AGPLv3, specifically the release of its modified source code.
• NEXT has begun adding Mastodon attributions to its website, but it’s unclear if the full source code has been shared as of the latest reports.
• The controversy has sparked public debate in Turkey, with some praising NEXT’s potential to rival X and others questioning its “national” credentials due to its Mastodon foundation.