Cursor dodged the huge bullet about Kimi K2.5
Two days ago, Cursor released the new Composer 2 model and the eval scores where were shown to be better than even Opus 4.6 (high). It was clear that the team did not train the model from the scratch, but Cursor did not mention anywhere which base model it is.
But then people found out it's the Kimi K2.5 model, and people started calling them out by mentioning that it's against Moonshot (the company behind Kimi models) terms of service to use the model for commercial purposes. This became interesting when several Moonshot folks started posting that Cursor did not come to them for licensing, as you see below.
But then the most interesting part was, all the above tweets from Kimi you see were suddenly deleted, and people started speculating – maybe Cursor paid Kimi for the license after posts went viral and more such theories.
The real story came out when Lee Robinson from the Cursor team posted the clarification post. Initially, he did not mention the name Kimi K2.5 in the main post but then when people were calling them out, he admits that it was the Kimi K2.5 model, and quotes this post from Kimi AI where they mention this:
Note: Cursor accesses Kimi-k2.5 via @FireworksAI_HQ' hosted RL and inference platform as part of an authorized commercial partnership.
So the whole story in simple terms is:
- Cursor licenses the Kimi K2.5 model via inference partner FireworksAI (not via Kimi)
- Heavily pretrains the model and releases as Composer 2
- People find out that the underlying model is Kimi K2.5
- Kimi folks didn't know this, so they post on X
- Cursor reaches out to them privately explaining everything
- Kimi folks delete the tweet, and post the clarification
Basically, no one was in the wrong here, and it's just an example of miscommunication, especially from Cursor's side. This could have gone very wrong for Cursor, but I'm glad the situation is now under control.