[License-review] ModelGo Zero License, Version 2.0

[Moming Duan]

Hi Eric,

> On 14 Feb 2025, at 10:56 AM, Eric Schultz <eric at wwahammy.com> wrote:
> 
> To me, that implies that the usage of licensed works are dependent upon the usage being legal. That's not a requirement that an OSD compliant license can have; additionally, it's unnecessary, the state already enforces those rules, you don't need the license holder to do so as well.

I am not a lawyer, but my intuition is that a license will be ineffective or unenforceable if its terms do not comply with applicable law. 
Regarding OSD compliance, I think 2.3(a)(i) is not a discrimination clause against persons or groups, as every entity can be sued and suspected of breaking the law. 
My lawyer also advised retaining this clause, as we do not intend for the licensor to be liable for the illegal use of licensed materials.
I failed to convince my lawyer to remove this clause because I cannot identify who would be harmed by it, and its removal may increase potential risks.


> PS: While the Open Source AI definition says you don't have to include the source data to be an "Open Source AI", I would disagree with that conclusion. But that's my own two cents.

My personal view is that open-source AI systems require open-source datasets, but open-source models do not. I believe the scope of open source should not extend to parts governed by another license or applicable law, as such proliferation could cause inconsistencies and conflicts in license terms.  As an open-source model, it should, at a minimum, keep its parameters and architecture available and should not prohibit any kind of use of its generated output, such as reverse engineering or distillation.


Best,
Moming
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20250214/36fe64a9/attachment.htm>