<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">Hi Stefano,<div><br></div><div><br><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Thanks for your clarification! I think it's better to avoid such copyleft-style provisions that may potentially harm legal compliance in the overall software ecosystem. On the other hand, data is often already covered by free-content licenses (e.g., CC), which do not restrict model training and may not need an OSI-approved license. (</span>I’m not a lawyer, this is just based on my research experience in license compliance<span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">)</span></div><div><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Thanks again for your opinion! I will prepare the materials and move forward with the OSI license review process soon.</p></div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Moming<br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 11 Feb 2025, at 6:41 PM, Stefano Maffulli <stefano@opensource.org> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 11:22 AM "D 莫名 (dewitt)" <<a href="mailto:duanmoming@gmail.com">duanmoming@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div></div><div>BTW, from my understanding, the current OSAID applies to AI systems, correct? </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div style="font-size:small" class="gmail_default">yes, the OSAID refers to and includes a definition of "AI system". It was required because we needed to anchor the discussion to something concrete. Think of the Open Source Definition #2 Source Code stating "The program must include source code". In the context of software we knew what "the program" was, therefore there was no need to dive any deeper into that rat's nest.</div><div style="font-size:small" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-size:small" class="gmail_default">For AI, we (collectively) needed to understand what the word "program" represents before we could understand what the words "source code" meant. The equivalent of "Program" is "AI system" as defined by the OECD. As the OSAID FAQ say <a href="https://opensource.org/ai/faq#what-is-an-ai-system">https://opensource.org/ai/faq#what-is-an-ai-system</a>:</div><div style="font-size:small" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-size:small" class="gmail_default"> an AI system is “the thing” that processes input to produce output,
whether that’s a prediction, recommendation, or another result.</div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div>Is it a requirement for open-source model licenses to comply with it? For example, should an open-source model license include terms ensuring that its code and data are also governed by an OSI-approved license?</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style="font-size:small" class="gmail_default">I have opinions but they're personal opinions so I won't state them here. I'd be happy to hear what others think though.</div><br></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.<br><br>License-discuss mailing list<br>License-discuss@lists.opensource.org<br>http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>