[HN Gopher] Meta revokes Llama 2 licenses for anyone making a co...
___________________________________________________________________
Meta revokes Llama 2 licenses for anyone making a copyright claim
Author : andy99
Score : 14 points
Date : 2024-03-11 21:23 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (twitter.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
| andy99 wrote:
| Whatever one's view of copyright claims against genAI (and
| personally I think they are meritless), this should be a wakeup
| call for people who don't see the difference between "source
| available" and "open source". Meta pretend it's models are open
| source but of course retains the right to control how they are
| used. Now the distinction isn't hypothetical.
| artninja1988 wrote:
| Can't really fault them for not disclosing their datasets etc.
| Without meaningful protections it would be a huge legal
| liability.
| sp332 wrote:
| It's understandable, but they shouldn't be taking credit for
| being open source when they are not.
| YetAnotherNick wrote:
| There is no difference between them with regards to licensing.
| The company distributing open source could change license
| anytime they wish, but they can't change license for the user
| who have accepted previous license when downloading the code.
| onion2k wrote:
| _Meta pretend it 's models are open source but of course
| retains the right to control how they are used._
|
| That's true of a lot of open source licences too. For example,
| the GPL states that you need to share the source including any
| changes you make else your license to use the original code
| will be revoked.
| artninja1988 wrote:
| As they should. Open sourcing things should not be a legal
| liability. Open models have to have some sort of protection
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-11 23:02 UTC)