5 ms·
I am not a lawyer, but the consensus (around here anyway) seems to be that weights cannot be copyrighted since they are the output of an automated process, so p
by bryananderson 4y ago
I am not a lawyer, but the consensus (around here anyway) seems to be that weights cannot be copyrighted since they are the output of an automated process, so perhaps the license cannot limit how the weights are used. The code can be copyrighted, but the code can also be reimplemented from scratch and used to load the weights.
- clbrmbr 4y agoJust because they cannot be copyrighted doesn’t mean that they cannot be considered a trade secret. The agreement for using the product could done with an NDA. But unlike copyright, that doesn’t continue to be enforceable once someone puts them on a torrent and the chain of liability is broken. /notalawyereither
- dchest 4y agoYeah, this happened with RC4 cipher which used to be a trade secret until someone posted it on Usenet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RC4#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RC4#History
- throwaway1851 4y agoWell, trade secret law requires the owner of the trade secret to take steps to keep it... secret. Facebook has done the opposite, and they haven’t made the people they distributed the weights to sign an NDA.
- ronsor 4y agoAnd Facebook employees openly discuss the torrent magnet links.
- Der_Einzige 4y agoGod damn I hope this is where IP law lands. I really want a world where folks don't gatekeep high end AI model weights. Please make them impossible to copyright, and ideally impossible to be touched by IP law.
- hgsgm 4y agoWhy? I mean, do you feel differently about every other patented invention or IP? That would be weird.
- bogwog 4y agoThat seems like wishful thinking. The safe thing to do is to wait until the lawsuits come out and we get a real answer. Or if you’re not risk averse, then go for it and take one for the team!
- Animats 4y agoThe US doesn't have database copyright, but some countries, including the entire European Union, do.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
- mx20 4y agoInteresting. That could be a huge disadvantage for the EU and it's companies that want to use AI and also often can't give their Data to third parties. But I am not sure a neural net is even considered a DB. Because when this was created they clearly had structured Information accessed by people in mind. There has to be some distinction otherwise I make a db that stores digits of PI in a file and if you publish part of it, that is considered substantial enough, you are infringing on my DB rights.
- hgsgm 4y agoIf I copy your database, that violates copyright. I generate the same data using my own process, it doesn't. That's different from creative works where it's implausible to claim that you created the same work independently of someone else.
- amoss 4y agoThose protections rely on "systematic arrangement", i.e. that some effort has been put into finding, verifying and collection a set of facts / individual pieces of data. It is not obvious that would apply to the set of weights that come out of a training algorithm. (standard I'm not a lawyer, I don't know but I suspect it is unclear enough that it would need to be argued in court).
- sdenton4 4y agoI assure you that if you scramble the weights of a neutral networks, the model will perform poorly... Training something new cost millions of dollars in accelerator and research salary, and evaluation ('verifying') is a big part of the work.
- karmasimida 4y agoNot copy right, but doesn't mean this isn't someone's property.
- barnabee 4y agoInformation can’t be property. IP “rights” are a perverse legal fiction that have inflicted untold damage.