4 ms·
Yup, but that being said, Llama is GPLv3 weather Meta likes it or not. Same as ChatGPT and all the others. ALL of them can perfectly reproduce GPLv3 licensed wo
by Grimblewald 1y ago
Yup, but that being said, Llama is GPLv3 weather Meta likes it or not. Same as ChatGPT and all the others. ALL of them can perfectly reproduce GPLv3 licensed works and data, making them derivative work, and the license is quite clear on that matter. In fact up until recently you could get chatGPT to info dump all sorts of things with that argument, but now when you try you will hit a network error, and afterwards it seems something breaks and it goes back to parroting a script on how it's under a proprietary license.
- Iolaum 1y agoThis is interesting but it has not been proven in court, right?
- Grimblewald 1y agorelated stuff has, the core part being that if your model reproduces parts or all of a licensed work, it needs to comply with the license / copyright. Otherwise why aren't pirates just making 'models' that generate protected material, or music, and completely bypass all laws? I know because I wanted to, as a form of protest/performance art, train a model to a few Disney movies and publicly distribute, but legal advice was this would put me directly into hot water not just because of who im pissing off (which i knew and was comfortable with) but also the fact there was precedent (i.e. news papers suing LLM providers). It would be an open and shut case that would leave me in financial ruin. The reason openAI hasn't been struck with this yet is, who has the time? and there isn't much to learn from all that either. Most open source tooling out competes openAI's offering as is, so the community wouldn't really win beyond punishing someone.
- _aavaa_ 1y agoI don't see how this follows at all. Github isn't GPL3 just because it stores and gives you back gpl3 code
- Grimblewald 1y agoread the license, and look up what derivative work means. If you're still unclear after that I'm happy to walk you through it.