Apple Notes Exporter Pro Licensing: What Happened, and How It Was Resolved
Our early releases shipped without the MIT attribution notice. That criticism was correct. The open-source developer who raised it has since confirmed publicly that we came into compliance, and that he verified it in the binary himself.
Confirmed by Konstantin Zaremski, 26 March 2026
“I reached out to the developer directly and they have since come into compliance with the MIT license attribution requirements. As of version 1.7 Build 3, proper attribution for Apple Notes Exporter is present in the app bundle and in-app acknowledgments. I verified this in the binary myself. The original analysis in my blog post remains accurate and unchanged, but I want to be fair and note that the issue has been resolved. Credit where it’s due for making it right.”
Posted by the author of the open-source Apple Notes Exporter on the same Reddit thread that raised the complaint, and edited into several of his replies there. Read the comment or the full thread.
What was raised, and what was accurate
In February 2026 a Reddit thread accused us of taking an open-source app and putting it behind a paywall. Two separate claims got bundled together in that discussion, and they have different answers.
The claim that we failed to include the required attribution was correct. There is no defence for it and we will not attempt one. A developer published useful work under a license that asks for almost nothing, and we did not hold up our end. The acknowledgements section was dropped during an AI-assisted update to our codebase and nobody caught it before release. That is an explanation rather than an excuse, because a release process that can silently drop a license notice is our problem to fix.
The claim that building a paid product on MIT-licensed code is itself illegal is not correct. Other people in that same thread pointed this out independently of us, and the license text is unambiguous. The next section quotes it.
We fixed the attribution, the developer confirmed the fix publicly after verifying it himself, and the rest of this page lays out the detail with links.
What the MIT license actually requires
The MIT license grants permission to “use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software” with a single condition attached:
“The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.”
That is the whole obligation. MIT does not require you to open-source your own code, pay a fee, ask permission, or share revenue. Selling software built on MIT code is contemplated by the word “sell” in the grant itself, and a large amount of commercial macOS software rests on MIT and BSD components on exactly this basis.
So the question was never whether we could charge for the app. It was whether the notice travelled with it. It did not, and that is a real violation of the one term the license sets. A license that asks for so little is one you have no excuse for breaking, which is why we fixed it rather than argued.
Timeline, with sources
Konstantin Zaremski publishes a forensic analysis of Apple Notes Exporter Pro, and a Reddit thread raises the issue publicly. The core complaint is that the MIT attribution notice is missing from our app.
The upstream repository is relicensed from MIT to GPL v3. Participants in the thread, including the developer, note that this applies going forward and does not retroactively relicense the MIT code.
We add the upstream copyright notice, the full MIT permission text, and in-app acknowledgements to the application bundle.
Zaremski posts publicly that he contacted us directly, that we have come into compliance with the MIT attribution requirements, and that he verified the attribution in the binary himself.
The attribution has shipped in every release since 1.7 build 3. We have also changed the function names that were originally modelled on the open-source project.
Sources for each step: the original analysis, the relicense commit, and the compliance confirmation.
What we say about the code itself
Apple has never shipped a bulk export API for Notes, so every tool in this category works around that in one of two ways, and Apple Notes Exporter Pro has used both.
Through version 1.5, export ran entirely through AppleScript, Apple’s own automation interface for the Notes app. It is the most sanctioned route available and needs no special file access. It is also slow on large libraries and cannot reach the attachment and folder fidelity people actually want.
We then added a direct read of the local Notes database, which is what lets a full-library export finish in reasonable time with folders and attachments intact. In building it we referenced the open-source project’s approach and used similarly named functions for the same operations. MIT permits that, including in a paid product, provided the notice ships. We have since renamed those functions in our own codebase.
We are describing our development path, not claiming we owe the project nothing. We built on MIT-licensed work and the notice should have shipped from the first release.
The relicense to GPL v3
On 25 February 2026, the day after the thread appeared, the upstream repository was relicensed from MIT to GPL v3. A copyright holder can relicense their own work whenever they choose, and picking a copyleft license to keep future derivatives open is entirely legitimate. We have no criticism of it.
Two consequences are worth stating plainly, and both were acknowledged in the thread itself:
- A relicense is not retroactive. Code published under MIT stays available under MIT to everyone who received it. The developer said so himself in the thread, describing it as not retroactively relicensing the old code obtained under MIT.
- GPL v3 governs what comes next. Code taken from the repository after the relicense carries copyleft terms, and combining it into a closed-source product would require releasing the combined work under GPL v3. We have not incorporated code published under GPL v3.
This matters for anyone reading the older discussion today, because comparison articles still describing the project as MIT-licensed are out of date. It is GPL v3 now.
Where your notes go
Nowhere. Exporting happens entirely on your Mac. There are no cloud uploads, no external processing service, and no account needed to run an export.
Reading the local Notes database requires Full Disk Access, granted in System Settings under Privacy & Security. macOS enforces that permission rather than us, so you can revoke it at any moment and the app loses access immediately.
You do not have to take the network claim on trust either. Little Snitch, LuLu, or macOS’s own network tooling will show you what any app talks to. That is the right level of scepticism to bring to anything you grant Full Disk Access, ours included.
Honest comparison
Current as of September 2026. The free project is a capable tool and this table is not written to make it look worse than it is.
| Feature | Apple Notes Exporter (free) | Apple Notes Exporter Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Free | $9.99 one-time, lifetime updates |
| License | GPL v3.0 (MIT before 25 Feb 2026) | Proprietary, MIT attribution included in the app bundle |
| Source available | Yes, on GitHub | No |
| Folder hierarchy preserved | Yes | Yes |
| Attachments preserved | Yes | Yes |
| Output formats | Markdown, HTML, PDF, DOC, LaTeX, RTF, TXT | Markdown, HTML, PDF, DOCX, LaTeX, RTF, TXT, EPUB, JSON, JSONL |
| Scheduled recurring backups | No | Yes (daily, weekly, monthly) |
| Runs fully offline | Yes | Yes |
| Support | Community and GitHub issues | Direct email support |
Which one you should use
Use the free open-source version if you want a one-off export to Markdown, HTML, PDF, or LaTeX, you like being able to read the source, or you simply prefer to support free software. It is on GitHub, it handles folders and attachments, and for a single migration it is often all anyone needs. Recommending it costs us a sale and it is still the right answer for a lot of people.
Use Apple Notes Exporter Pro if you want backups that run on a schedule rather than something you have to remember, you need DOCX, EPUB, JSON, or JSONL, or you want a support address that answers. Those are the differences worth $9.99, and if none of them apply, the free tool is the better choice.
We would rather be the company that tells you that than the one that gets caught not saying it.
Frequently asked questions
Is Apple Notes Exporter Pro compliant with the MIT license now?
Yes, and this is confirmed by the original open-source developer rather than only by us. On 26 March 2026, Konstantin Zaremski posted publicly: "I reached out to the developer directly and they have since come into compliance with the MIT license attribution requirements. As of version 1.7 Build 3, proper attribution for Apple Notes Exporter is present in the app bundle and in-app acknowledgments. I verified this in the binary myself." He added: "I want to be fair and note that the issue has been resolved. Credit where it's due for making it right." That statement is on the original Reddit thread that raised the complaint, and it has been edited into several of his comments there.
Is Apple Notes Exporter Pro stolen software or a scam?
No. The specific and legitimate complaint was that the MIT attribution notice was missing from the app, and that has been fixed and independently verified by the person who raised it. Using MIT-licensed open-source code inside a paid, closed-source product is expressly permitted by the MIT license, which grants the right to "use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software." The single condition is that the copyright and permission notice ships with it, which is exactly the condition our early releases failed and now meet.
Did Apple Notes Exporter Pro copy the open-source code wholesale?
Our account is that it did not. Export ran through AppleScript only, up to and including version 1.5. When we later added the faster database read, we referenced the open-source project's approach and used similarly named functions for the same operations, which MIT permits. We have since changed those function names in our own codebase. Konstantin Zaremski published a forensic analysis in February 2026 reaching harsher conclusions, and he has said that analysis remains accurate and unchanged even after confirming the attribution fix. We link his post below so you can read his side directly rather than only our summary of it.
Why was the attribution missing in the first place?
The acknowledgements section was dropped during an AI-assisted update to the codebase and nobody caught it before release. That is an explanation, not an excuse. The MIT license asks for one thing, shipping the notice, and a release process that can silently drop it is a process problem we owned and fixed.
Is the upstream open-source project still MIT licensed?
No. On 25 February 2026 it was relicensed from MIT to GPL v3. A relicense applies going forward and is not retroactive, so code published under MIT stays available under MIT to everyone who received it. Both the developer and other participants in the Reddit thread stated this plainly at the time. Anyone describing the project as MIT-licensed today is out of date.
Does the GPL v3 relicense mean Apple Notes Exporter Pro is now infringing?
No. The MIT-era code remains under MIT for anyone who received it, which is how open-source licensing works for every project. GPL v3 governs code taken from the repository after the relicense, and we have not incorporated code published under GPL v3. If we ever did, the honest options would be to comply with GPL v3 in full or to leave the code alone.
Do my notes leave my Mac when I export?
No. Exporting runs entirely on your machine, with no cloud upload, no external processing service, and no account needed to export. Reading the local Notes database requires Full Disk Access, which macOS enforces and you can revoke at any time. You can confirm the network behaviour yourself with Little Snitch, LuLu, or macOS network tooling rather than taking our word for it.
Should I buy Apple Notes Exporter Pro or use the free open-source version?
Use the free open-source version if you want a one-off export to Markdown, HTML, PDF, or LaTeX, you want to read the source, or you prefer to support free software. It is a good tool and for a single migration it is often all anyone needs. Apple Notes Exporter Pro is worth $9.99 if you want backups that run on a schedule, need DOCX, EPUB, JSON, or JSONL, or want a support address that answers. If none of those apply to you, use the free one.
Keep reading
- The best Apple Notes exporters for Mac for how the whole field compares, free tools included.
- Apple Notes Exporter Pro vs Exporter for a comparison against the leading free App Store option.
- Native Markdown export in macOS 26 vs Exporter Pro for what Apple now does for free.
- How to back up Apple Notes automatically for the scheduling feature covered above.
- Browse all Apple Notes export guides.
Apple Notes Exporter Pro
Ten export formats, folder structure and attachments preserved, scheduled backups, and every export processed on your own Mac. One-time $9.99 with lifetime updates.