Comment on š¤ Interesting
melfie@lemmy.zip āØ2ā© āØweeksā© ago
Using copyleft licenses for closed models is clearly against the spirit of the licenses if the users donāt have access to the source code that includes the original copyleft works. Even open weight models arenāt really the source code, and are more akin to a compiled binary. The source code is all the training data and code used to train the model such that anyone can build on it and train new models.
Iām not a lawyer and am not sure how well existing copyleft licenses like GPL or CC-SA would stand up in court to enforce this, but if they donāt, then stronger licenses that explicitly cover works being used as training data need to become more common.
Iāve seen the argument that the models are just learning from the data in the same way a human would. Thatās nonsense. Itās not like theyāre creating a sentient being with its own agency that can tell them to fuck off if it wants. These companies are running a software pipeline against copyrighted IP to convert it into a derivative work that is now supposedly wholly owned by said company, but the reality is that itās collectively owned by everyone who contributed to the copyleft training data.