> Here is the relevant Llama 3 license section, below, in it's entirety. I agree too that this is the relevant section. > It says that if you have 700M+ users

> Here is the relevant Llama 3 license section, below, in it's entirety. I agree too that this is the relevant section. > It says that if you have 700M+ users then you'll need a new license It does not say that. It says that if you or your affiliate had 700M+ users on the day of llama3's release date then you need an other licence. This does not trigger if you just gain 700M+ users. Simply it does not. It does trigger if you become affiliated by someone who in that past date already had 700M+ (for example if google buys you up, or if you become a strategic partner of google). The key here is "on the Meta Llama 3 version release date" which sets the exact date for when the monthly active users of the products or services should be counted. > It does not say what the terms of that new license will be Correct. And I assume the terms would be highly onerous. That I do not dispute. > or just believe me when I tell you that Zuck said it'll be a commercial license I believe you on that. That is not what we disagree on. The bit we seem to disagree on is when exactly do you need this extra licence. You state that you need it if your company gains in a future date 700M+ users. That is simply not supported by the very section you quoted above.