[License-review] Adapting the license-review process to AI

[Pamela Chestek]

On 9/9/2024 8:33 PM, Joseph Donahue wrote:
>
> There's at least one acronym, heretofore unfamiliar to me, being 
> tossed around in this thread. OSAID did not pop-up for me, in the 
> first page of search results 
> <https://search.brave.com/search?q=OSAID>, so I had to dig a bit.
>
> For the other passive followers out there, please correct me if I am 
> wrong, but it seems likely that OSAID is a reference to the drafts on 
> this page: https://opensource.org/deepdive/drafts
>
That's correct, and sorry to be incomplete. The most recent draft is 
0.0.9 nd the OSI expects to announce a release candidate in October.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chair, License Committee
Open Source Initiative

>
> <https://stackexchange.com/users/3795089/jwdonahue>
> On 9/9/2024 4:31 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> On 9/1/24 05:53, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
>>> - What new challenges do you expect to see in reviewing these licenses?
>>
>> I see three major challenges:
>>
>> 1. We'll need to review TOS for types of content which are not 
>> subject to copyright law (e.g. collections of model weights). To 
>> date, all of the license eval on this list has been within the 
>> framework of copyright law.  I suspect that I lot of us would need 
>> some education on how to evaluate non-copyright terms; I know that I 
>> will.
>>
>> 2. We will also need to evaluate whether certain types of content 
>> (model weights, training process docs, etc.) require any 
>> clarification of the OSD for compliance.
>>
>> 3. The OSAID certifies complete software systems, not just licensing 
>> documents.  So we will need to verify that the terms submitted are 
>> actually applied to the software available.  To date, L-R has 
>> operated by waiting for folks to submit documents to us; the OSAID 
>> will require us -- or someone else -- to perform a compliance review.
>>
>> > - Do you recommend any changes to the process in light of potential 
>> new challenges?
>>
>> Given the above, I'm pretty sure that we need some kind of organized 
>> digital tracking of verifications.
>>
>> We also might consider splitting the work.  I believe that L-R is 
>> going to be much better equipped to evaluate whether the various 
>> documents (licenses and terms) comply with the OSD, and leave it to 
>> another team (staff, maybe?) to evaluate whether the AI software 
>> actually uses all approved documents.
>>
>> Finally, I think we'll want to list approved documents which are not 
>> software licenses separately on the website from the software licenses.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
>
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20240909/95994c15/attachment.htm>