| ▲ | lxgr 3 days ago |
| > As long as you get the model weights without agreeing to the license But is that how it works? Not implying that the situation is otherwise comparable, but you e.g. can't ignore the GPL that a copyrighted piece of code is made available to you under, just because "you didn't agree to it". As I see it (as a non-lawyer), either model weights are copyrightable (then Meta's license would likely be enforceable), or they aren't, but then even "agreeing to the license" shouldn't be able to restrict what you can do with them. In other words, I'd consider it a very strange outcome if Meta could sue licensees for breach of contract for their use of the weights, but not non-licensees, if the license itself only covers something that Meta doesn't even have exclusive rights to in the first place. (Then again, stranger decisions have been made around copyright.) |
|
| ▲ | Borealid 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Your parent poster is quite clearly stating that they believe that model weights (ie, the model itself) cannot be copyrighted as it is not a creative work. If the model weights cannot be copyrighted, you are not violating copyright law by duplicating them in the absence of a license grant, so you gain no benefit in entering into a contract by agreeing to the license. |
| |
| ▲ | lxgr 3 days ago | parent [-] | | That's what I'm wondering about. I believe contracts under US law need "consideration" for both sides, and I'm not sure publicly available, non-copyrightable weights alone would hold up in court, even if the "licensee" explicitly accepts a license agreement as a contract. |
|
|
| ▲ | rafaelmn 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think OP is arguing that the weights are not copyrightable but you're agreeing to ~ EULA by accepting terms when you acquire it ? Not sure that works either but that's how I understood them. |
| |
| ▲ | michaelt 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | If you get the Llama weights from Meta directly, you need to make an account [1] and hand over your "full legal name, date of birth, and full organization name" (and presumably click 'agree' on a click-through agreement) before they'll let you download them. You can sidestep this by just downloading someone else's quantisation / fine tune. [1] https://huggingface.co/meta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Inst... | |
| ▲ | lxgr 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Thinking about an absurd example to illustrate my point: Imagine you find a printed copy of "Moby Dick". On the first page, you see the statement: "By reading this work, you are entering into a legally binding contract, obligating you to not spoil the ending to anybody under penalty of $100, payable as a charitable donation to NYPL." Can whoever printed the (out of copyright) book sue you if you spoil the ending and don't make the donation? Would things change if you were to sign the first page with your name? | | |
| ▲ | _aavaa_ 3 days ago | parent [-] | | A physical book, no. A digital book, cynically I think yes since you don’t own a copy you own a license to use it. | | |
| ▲ | alain94040 3 days ago | parent [-] | | [I'm not a lawyer but spent way too much time with intellectual property lawyers] Not true either for a digital book. However, since you are in possession of a digital copy of something that is definitely copyrightable, you have two options to defend yourself and not go to jail: either use the license terms that give you the digital rights to the book (and pay the $100), or not have a license, not have a defense, and let the judge decide what the penalty should be. Will it be more than $100? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | ratatoskrt 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I can agree to the license, download the weights, and send them to you. Now you have the weights without ever agreeing to the license. Code is different because it's copyrighted. |
