Unless you've explicitly agreed to this, or operate in a litigation-happy country and don't have a budget for lawyers and the small risk of loosing, feel free to ignore this license and others like it. Weights are not currently copyrightable. We have a photo of a smiling monkey to prove it.
What a shame for something that could have been completely free from copyright issues given the training source… (And they're still no legal ground on such a license claim since training hardly qualify as creative process on their side)
The training data is licensed under various Creative Commons licenses. These are not in anyway "completely free of copyright issues". Most of them have specific conditions on their use.
Every time I call out the absurd interpretation of "Open Source" in this space in general, I get showered with downvotes and hateful attacks. One time someone posted their "AI mashup" project on reddit, that egregiously violated the terms of not only one, but several GPL-licensed projects. Calling this out earned me a lot of downvotes and replies with absolutely insane justifications from people with no clue.
Nope. Most of the relevant software is OSS made by hobbyists. ComfyUI, llama.cpp, etc. For example, Nvidia is building stuff based on ComfyUI, a GPL-licensed application.
My complaint is about people ignoring the license of open source software made by hobbyists. I disagree with your ignorant "AI fans" generalization.
Open Source, as used by the most influential open source projects, is corporate-friendly by definition.
There are good reasons to use something more aggressive. I'm a big fan of the strict copyleft licenses for this, even if that means companies like Google don't want to that software anymore.
