(I just opened up the workflow_use and noticed the AGPL license. Given the situation, it is best I don't even open or look at the code. I'm going to have to figure this one out myself. I did watched the video, very cool stuff.)
workflow-use is currently just an early implementation of some of the ideas for repeatable workflows, there's not much secret sauce to worry about from an IP standpoint yet. you could also use deepwiki to safely paraphrase it / get an overview of the architecture.
It is still a dangerous grey area. If Browser Use is acquired by Mega_Corp for the $10B its IP is worth, I would have to prove that my product isn't a derivative of Workflow Use, otherwise, I, or a company that contracts me, am obligated by law to link to Mega_Corp. If there is prior art as you say, I will be able to find and use that as long as it uses a less restrictive license like MIT.
deepwiki is awesome and my first time learning about it
