Hacker News Reader

Instead of a license term you can put that in your documentation - in fact that is exactly what the code of practice mentions (see my other comment) for open source models.

An open source cocaine production machine is still an illegal cocaine production machine. The fact that it's open source doesn't matter.

You seem to not have understood that different forms of appliances need to comply with different forms of law. And you being able to call it open source or not doesn't change anything about its legal aspects.

And every law written is a compromise between two opposing parties.

I'm not sure what do you mean. Statement "open source models can just add a clause to the terms of use, restricting how it can be used" is false, because in that case, it won't be open source. Does it mean that the open source needs to comply with the laws? Absolutely, but that might mean that open source models are effectively illegal.

“Source available” then?