Am I correct to conclude that this means they eventually will?
It's unclear to me from Google's docs exactly what "open" means for Gemma
They are not “open training” (either in the training code or training data sense), so they are not reproducible, which some have suggested ought to be a component of the definition of open models.
Some companies (such as those working on AI) believe this is legal, others (such as the copyright holders to those books) believe it isn't.
In any case, IMHO it's unlikely any cutting edge models will be offering us their training data any time soon.
Meta’s LLaMa 2 license is not Open Source https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36820122
yes, similar to the llama models, you'll also need to accept the license to download them officially. But the llama models have been unofficially downloadable without accepting the license for quite a while, so it's probably just a matter of time.