[License-review] For Approval: OpenMDW License Agreement, versions 1.1 (OpenMDW-1.1)

[Moming Duan]

Hi Dolan,


4. The API and RAG hypo (Moming's point).


Moming, I don't think your hypothetical works as stated under the definition of Model Materials. Model Materials means the materials "provided to you" under the agreement. A provider's server-side store of user inputs is never provided to the user and is therefore not part of any user's Model Materials. A user of a hosted API typically receives no Model Materials at all and needs no copyright license to use a hosted service; the provider's terms of service govern that relationship, not this license. A claim that a provider is misusing your inputs is a claim about the provider's conduct, not a claim that materials provided to you infringe. I do not see how OpenMDW would apply in this scenario, as that conduct likely falls under their terms of use or service agreement.


Thanks for the detailed follow-up. Let me summarize what I understand from your explanation. Please correct me if I am wrong:

1) Users who access a model through an API are not licensees. They are not bound by this license, the acceptance clause (By exercising rights granted to you under this agreement, you accept and agree to its terms) never triggers for them, and Paragraphs 5 and 8 do not apply to them either.

2) "Provided to you" means a copy of the Model Materials has been transferred to the user.


3) So if a vector database for RAG ships with the model as part of the release, it is provided to the user. In that case, claiming my work stored in it would trigger Paragraph 5.


Best,
Moming


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20260901/9050f8a0/attachment.htm>