There's always going to be some nerds out there that want to make and release a model as open, and share their knowledge along the way. I'm not too concerned.

The fear you're sharing has been shared since day 1 of open-weight models and it has yet to come to fruition.

Further, regardless of what any of these labs license their model as, the end user who has downloaded the weights can still use them for virtually any purpose (synthetic data, classification, etc) as much as they want and there is no way to reasonably enforce a license on those outputs.

So even if you can't run a service using this model's weights (without a license), the weights still do provide utility for training new models with any other license.

*Edit, responding to the replies: Constraints give rise to ingenuity. Who knows how we'll be training models in the future. Hopefully in a distributed fashion, maybe with some kind of consensus-driven training dataset selection. Crowd funding, etc. There's too many people that want this, and the knowledge on how to do it is out there (many times by now)

I think this is a quite optimistic view... releasing a SOTA model is a collosal capital investment, and unlike free software, it's not iterative - you can't make a small model and improve it one step at a time, you need to risk the whole load of cash, expertise and GPU time up front.

It's only happening now because labs have bucket tons of VC cash to burn and need a big public flex to raise more cash, or because they're subsidised by the Chinese government. I'm not massively confident either of those will stay true forever.

Unless "some nerds" means "billionaires" - they may want to release new models as open source, but they will not have enough money to train a worthwhile model.