<div dir="auto">Dear David Woolley,<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thank you for your feedback.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I believe that a license should protect the rights holders of datasets, and withholding datasets is unacceptable (for example, they might contain private data). Also, users have the right to know what data a model was "trained" on. Since datasets and weights are not code, existing licenses cannot affect this in any way.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As for reproducibility, I did not intend to make "AI Body" fully reproducible in practice, which is why I used the term "Theoretical Reproducibility" \u2013 this term is primarily meant to encourage dataset openness. Perhaps I should refine the definition of "Theoretical Reproducibility."</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Sincerely,</div><div dir="auto">Mikhail Potekha</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">\u043f\u0442, 17 \u0438\u044e\u043b. 2026\u202f\u0433., 06:29 David Woolley <<a href="mailto:forums@david-woolley.me.uk">forums@david-woolley.me.uk</a>>:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">In general, I don't think it is close to being well drafted, but I'll<br>
pick some points specific to the application.<br>
<br>
On Thu, 2026-07-16 at 16:28 +1000, Mihail Poteha wrote:<br>
> I am an independent developer from Russia, and I am creating my own<br>
> AI license. To date, I have not found a license for Open AI. All<br>
> existing licenses, including OSAID, allow datasets to be withheld,<br>
> either partially or in full, thereby creating a \u201cblack box.\u201d Such<br>
<br>
For most applications of AI training on datasets that you can freely<br>
redistribute will give them inadequate diversity to be useful in the<br>
real world.<br>
<br>
> licenses also fail to protect the rights holders of the datasets. I<br>
> disagree with this approach.<br>
<br>
Nothing in the main text stood out as achieving that, and it seemed to<br>
me that the licence only really works if none of authors of the<br>
training material intend to exercise any of their rights.<br>
> <br>
> Theoretical Reproducibility. A property of the model\u2019s source file<br>
> that, in theory, makes it possible to recreate a complete copy of the<br>
> language model\u2019s source file on the basis of the instructions and<br>
> tools specified in the AI Body. The Author must provide complete <br>
<br>
AI models are trained using random numbers, and training tends to be<br>
massively parallel. Even with explicit seeds, programming languages do<br>
not specify the algorithm used to create the random sequences, so they<br>
could differ over time and between machines. The parallelism also<br>
introduces the possibility of different scheduling orders.<br>
<br>
At inference time, simpler user interfaces won't include the ability to<br>
set seed values, and many users will not want exact repeatability. For<br>
training that converges and inference that converges, you can only<br>
define statistical properties of the result, not exact values.<br>
<br>
I'm not sure if the OSD forces you to publish private modifications,<br>
but it is generally not part of the open source culture, and it is<br>
unenforceable, because it is happening in private.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<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 <a href="http://opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.<br>
<br>
License-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div>