Hacker News Reader

If someone wants to release weights but attach a no commercial license to it I'm somewhat fine with that. I won't be able to sell it behind a shallow API but I'll be able to use the output of the model (that can't be prohibited) and sell that or do whatever I like with it. It's not as ideal as CC0 but I'm ok with the compromise.

View on HN

> I'll be able to use the output of the model (that can't be prohibited)

If the model is copyrightable, they can prohibit you from running the model for a commercial purpose, even if they don't have copyright on the output.

Not sure why you are downvoted, this is exactly my concerns with llama. You can’t run llama with the intent of distilling your own commercial model.

(Maybe it's wishful thinking. But, precisely. My analogy would be: you can't run Visual C++ for commercial purposes without a valid licence, even though (ignoring linking against the runtime), the license of a compiler doesn't affect the licence of the output.

If weights are copyrightable, then you need permission to copy them into computer memory/run them, just like any application.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com