AI Model Weight Providers Should Not Police Uses, No Matter How Awful They Are

Re:AI Model Weight Providers Should Not Police Uses, No Matt... by jomoho on Friday September 01, 2023 @10:13AM (#37351102)

I wonder how much of these "restrictive" licenses are just attempts at whitewashing, virtue signalling and generally trying to cover their own asses. If someone wants to use publicly available weights in an illegal way, there is no way a license is going to stop them, just as much as the existing laws won't stop them. That being said I agree with the overall sentiment that breaking the division of powers and putting creation and enforcement of laws regarding model usage is outside of the scope of a model provider.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AI Model Weight Providers Should Not Police Uses, No Matt... by coldtea on Friday September 01, 2023 @10:15AM (#37351126)

>and generally trying to cover their own asses.

All of them?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AI Model Weight Providers Should Not Police Uses, No Matt... by 0xcde4c3db on Friday September 01, 2023 @11:43AM (#37352252)

Has it been established that these even are licenses? A license provides authorization to do something that one would otherwise be prohibited from doing, but that assumes that copyright (or some sui generis right) covers model weights. Most of the findings/rulings I've seen talked about have been on the topics of inferred outputs and applications mixing them with human-authored elements, not about the model weights themselves.

[ Parent | on HN ]