3 ms·

Sure, you can write all kinds of stuff in a license, but it is simply plain prose at that point. Not enforcable. There is a reason why it is generally advised

Sure, you can write all kinds of stuff in a license, but it is simply plain prose at that point. Not enforcable. There is a reason why it is generally advised to go with the established licenses and not invent your own, similarly to how you should not roll your own cryptography: Because it most likely won't work as intended. e.g. License: This comment is licensed under my custom L*a license. Any user with an username starting with "L" and ending in "a" is forbidden from reading my comment and producing replies based on what I have written. ... see?

LunaSea 2y ago
You can absolutely write a license that contains the clauses I mentioned and it would be enforceable. Sorry, but the onus is on OpenAI to read the licenses not the creator. And throwing your hands in the air and saying "oh you can't do that in a license" is also of little use.
- CaptainFever 2y ago
  No, it would not be enforceable. Your license can only give additional rights to users. It cannot restrict rights that users already have (e.g. fair use rights in the US, or AI training rights like in the EU or SG).
  - LunaSea 2y ago
    How does Fair Use consider commercial usage of the full content in the US?
    - CaptainFever 2y ago
      It's unknown yet, but the main point is that the inputs don't matter, as long as the output does not replicate the full content, it is fine.
- Lichtso 2y ago
  > You can absolutely write a license that contains the clauses I mentioned and it would be enforceable. A license (copyright law) is not a contract (contract law). Simply publishing something does not make the whole world enter into a contract with you. Others first have to explicitly agree to do so. > Sorry, but the onus is on OpenAI to read the licenses not the creator. They can ignore it because they never agreed to it in the first place. > And throwing your hands in the air and saying "oh you can't do that in a license" is also of little use. It is very useful to know what works and what does not. That way you don't trick yourself and your work to be safe, don't get caught by surprise if you are in fact not and can think of alternatives instead. BTW, a thing you can do (which CaptainFever mentioned) and lots of services do because licenses are so weak is to make people sign up with an account and have them enter a ToS agreement instead.
  - LunaSea 2y ago
    > They can ignore it because they never agreed to it in the first place. They did by accessing and copying the code. Same as a human cloning a repository and using it's content or someone accessing a website with Terms of Use. No signed contract is needed here.
    - CaptainFever 2y ago
      > They did by accessing and copying the code. By default, copying is disallowed because of copyright. Your license provides them a right to copy the code, perhaps within certain restrictions. However, sometimes copying is allowed, such as fair use (I covered this in another comment I sent you). This would allow them to copy the code regardless of the license. > Same as a human cloning a repository and using it's content or someone accessing a website with Terms of Use. I've covered the cloning/copying part already, but "I agree to this ToS by continuing to browse this webpage" is called a clickwrap agreement. Its enforceability is dubious. I think the LinkedIn case showed that it only applied if HiQ actually explicitly agreed to it by signing up.

LunaSea 2y ago

You can absolutely write a license that contains the clauses I mentioned and it would be enforceable. Sorry, but the onus is on OpenAI to read the licenses not the creator. And throwing your hands in the air and saying "oh you can't do that in a license" is also of little use.

CaptainFever 2y ago
No, it would not be enforceable. Your license can only give additional rights to users. It cannot restrict rights that users already have (e.g. fair use rights in the US, or AI training rights like in the EU or SG).
- LunaSea 2y ago
  How does Fair Use consider commercial usage of the full content in the US?
  - CaptainFever 2y ago
    It's unknown yet, but the main point is that the inputs don't matter, as long as the output does not replicate the full content, it is fine.
Lichtso 2y ago
> You can absolutely write a license that contains the clauses I mentioned and it would be enforceable. A license (copyright law) is not a contract (contract law). Simply publishing something does not make the whole world enter into a contract with you. Others first have to explicitly agree to do so. > Sorry, but the onus is on OpenAI to read the licenses not the creator. They can ignore it because they never agreed to it in the first place. > And throwing your hands in the air and saying "oh you can't do that in a license" is also of little use. It is very useful to know what works and what does not. That way you don't trick yourself and your work to be safe, don't get caught by surprise if you are in fact not and can think of alternatives instead. BTW, a thing you can do (which CaptainFever mentioned) and lots of services do because licenses are so weak is to make people sign up with an account and have them enter a ToS agreement instead.
- LunaSea 2y ago
  > They can ignore it because they never agreed to it in the first place. They did by accessing and copying the code. Same as a human cloning a repository and using it's content or someone accessing a website with Terms of Use. No signed contract is needed here.
  - CaptainFever 2y ago
    > They did by accessing and copying the code. By default, copying is disallowed because of copyright. Your license provides them a right to copy the code, perhaps within certain restrictions. However, sometimes copying is allowed, such as fair use (I covered this in another comment I sent you). This would allow them to copy the code regardless of the license. > Same as a human cloning a repository and using it's content or someone accessing a website with Terms of Use. I've covered the cloning/copying part already, but "I agree to this ToS by continuing to browse this webpage" is called a clickwrap agreement. Its enforceability is dubious. I think the LinkedIn case showed that it only applied if HiQ actually explicitly agreed to it by signing up.