<html><body><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000"><div><br></div><div>Moming,</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>while reviewing the modifications to decide on the approval (actually it should be better to withdraw and resubmit at the end of the discussion) I noticed that the modifications only applied to the MG-by and not to the Open Source version.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><div>Comparing the two texts, moreover I see that here the liability disclaimer says "to the maximum extent permissible under applicable law, the Licensed Materials are provided on an \u201cas is" and \u201cas available\u201d basis without any representation, warranty, *condition* or term of any kind (whether express, implied, statutory or otherwise)... </div><div><br></div><div>"condition, or term" does not appear in the other license and I think it does not make sense adding it at all, since the license <b>has</b> terms and conditions. <br><br>At least, however, I think you should port the improvements of the Attribution license to the Open Source one, I really don't see why, while sharing like 95% of the provisions, this has not been done to the identical ones here: the rationale applies equally.</div><div><br></div><div>I also object using "Source Code Form" for "preferred form for making modifications, since most evidently the definition includes way more than source code and it is not good practice to define something with a name which is misleading.</div><div><br></div><div>I am still dubious that you can include the Output in the Derivative definition and that a license can purport to control it. This shall undergo more discussion, here and elsewhere, as it is a central point upon which I tried to make an impression every time I discussed porting Open Source concepts to the world of AI.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>At present, I am not inclined to approve the ModelGo Open Source license, while for the Attribution, after the changes at least, I don't see major problems.</div><div><br></div><div>For the "zero", I think the title is misleading, because it has no "zero" conditions, and I have not made a final opinion yet.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>Best,</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>Carlo</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div></div><hr id="zwchr" data-marker="__DIVIDER__"><div data-marker="__HEADERS__"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #1010FF;margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>Da: </b>"Moming Duan" <duanmoming@gmail.com><br><b>A: </b>"license-review@lists.opensource.org" <license-review@lists.opensource.org><br><b>Inviato: </b>Mercoledì, 18 giugno 2025 11:31:21<br><b>Oggetto: </b>[License-review] [2nd Resubmission] ModelGo Attribution License, Version 2.0<br></blockquote></div><div data-marker="__QUOTED_TEXT__"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #1010FF;margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;">Dear OSI Community,<br><br><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Following our previous discussions in May, I have made further revisions to the ModelGo </span>Attribution<span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> License (MG-BY-2.0). I am submitting this updated version for OSI review via this email. The license text is attached.</span></div><br><div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#ff0000">\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014 Major Updates to Previous Submission</font></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#ff0000"><br></font></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><li><font color="#ff0000">Removes restrictions on model output.</font></li><li><font color="#ff0000">Revises the termination clause to provide for automatic termination.</font></li><li><font color="#ff0000">Adds more explicit granting of rights in Section 2.1. </font></li><li><font color="#ff0000">Narrows the definition of \u201cDerivative Materials\u201d by including the phrase: \u201cin order to replicate, approximate, or otherwise achieve functional behavior that is similar to the Model.\u201d </font></li><li><font color="#ff0000">Removes \u201cDerivative Materials\u201d in Section 5: \u201cNothing in this License permits You to modify this License as applied to the Licensed Materials.\u201d </font></li><li><font color="#ff0000">Fixes typos and formatting issues.</font></li></div></div><br><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014 </span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">License </span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Introduction</span></div><div><b><br></b></div><div><b>License Name</b>:<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">ModelGo </span>Attribution<span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> License</span></div><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><b>Version</b>: <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>2.0</span></div><div><font color="#000000"><b>Short Identifier: <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></b>MG-BY-2.0</font></div><div><b style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Copyleft:</b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-weight: bold; white-space: pre;"> </span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">No</span></div><div><b>Legacy or New</b>: <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>New License</div><div><b>Drafted By Lawyer</b>: <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Yes, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP</div><div><b>Approved or <span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Used</span> by Projects</b>: <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>No</div><br><div><b>License URL</b>:<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><a href="https://ids.nus.edu.sg/modelgo-mg-by.html" target="_blank">https://ids.nus.edu.sg/modelgo-mg-by.html</a><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><b>Introduction and Video</b>:<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><a href="https://www.modelgo.li/" target="_blank">https://www.modelgo.li/</a><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><br><div><b>Overview</b>:</div><br><div>ModelGo Attribution License Version 2.0 (MG-BY-2.0) is a new license designed for publishing models (typically neural networks like Llama2, DeepSeek). It is one of the variants in the ModelGo License family. MG-BY-2.0 is the a permissive license in the ModelGo family, requiring that the original license <font color="#ff0000">and attribution</font> be provided when distributing the original Licensed Materials or Derivative Materials (<span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Licensed Materials and </span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Derivative Materials are</span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> </span>defined in Clause 1). <font color="#ff0000">A statement of modification is required, if applicable.</font></div><div><font color="#ff0000">(Red content represents the differences from MG0-2.0 license)</font></div><br><div><b>Complies with OSD:</b></div><div><b><br></b></div><div>OSD 3 Derived Works \u2014 MG-BY-2.0 <span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> </span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Clause 2.1 (a) grants copyright and patent rights to create derivatives.</span></div><div>OSD 5 and OSD 6 \u2014 No discrimination clause is included in MG-BY-2.0.</div><div>OSD 9 License Must Not Restrict Other Software \u2014 No such restriction is included in MG-BY-2.0.</div><br><div><b>The Gap to Fill:</b></div><div>Model sharing is very common on the web, with over 1.4 million models currently listed on Hugging Face (<a href="https://huggingface.co/models" target="_blank">https://huggingface.co/models</a>). However, most of these models are not properly licensed. When publishing their models, developers typically choose from three main options (as seen in the model license tags on the Hugging Face website):</div><br><div><ul class="MailOutline"><li>OSS licenses, e.g., Apache-2.0, MIT</li><li>Open responsible AI licenses (OpenRAILs), e.g., CreativeML-OpenRAIL-M, OpenRAIL++</li><li>Proprietary Licenses, e.g., Llama2, Llama3</li></ul></div><br><div>However, not all licenses are well-suited for model publishing.</div><br><div><b>Why not use OSS licenses? </b></div><div>Traditional OSS licenses lack clear definitions regarding machine learning concepts, such as Models, Output, and Derivatives created through knowledge transfer. This ambiguity can result in certain ML activities (e.g., Distillation, Mix-of-Expert) being beyond the control of the model owner.</div><br><div><b>Why not use OpenRAILs? </b></div><div>Recently, Responsible AI Licenses (<a href="https://www.licenses.ai/" target="_blank">https://www.licenses.ai/</a>) have been widely advocated to govern AI technologies, aiming to restrict unlawful and unethical uses of models. While I acknowledge the growing need for such governance, these copyleft-style restrictions do not comply with the OSD and may cause incompatibility with licenses like GPL-3.0. Another concern is that these behavioral restrictions may proliferate within the AI model ecosystem, increasing the risk of license breaches.</div><br><div><b style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Why not use Llama2 or Llama3 Licenses?</b></div><div><font color="#000000">These licenses are proprietary licenses that are not reusable. </font>Furthermore, they include exclusive terms such as "You will not use the Llama Materials or any output or results of the Llama Materials to improve any other large language model" and copyleft-style behavioral restrictions.</div><br><div>In fact, the dilemma in current model publishing is the lack of a general-purpose license for model developers. Additionally, since no single license meets diverse model publishing needs, some developers resort to using CC licenses with different elements. However, CC licenses are ill-suited for this purpose as they do not grant patent rights. This motivated the drafting of ModelGo License family, which provides different licensing elements similar to CC but specifically designed for model publishing.</div><br><div><b>Comparison with Existing OSI-Approved Licenses:</b></div><div>Since I could not find an OSI-approved model license, I can only compare MG-BY-2.0 with one similar OSS license \u2014 Apache-2.0</div><div><br><div><li style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">MG-BY-2.0 defines licensed materials and derivative works differently from Apache-2.0, tailoring them to models.</li><li style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">MG-BY-2.0 can govern the remote access (e.g., chatbot) scenario.</li></div></div><br><div>If further comparisons or supporting evidence are needed to strengthen my claims, please let me know. I am more than willing to engage in further discussions with the OSI community about this license and contribute to promoting standardized model publishing. <span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">\U0001f917</span></div><br><br><div>Best,</div><div>Moming</div><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>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.<br><br>License-review mailing list<br>License-review@lists.opensource.org<br>http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org<br></blockquote></div></div></body></html>