I fucked with the title a bit. What i linked to was actually a mastodon post linking to an actual thing. but in my defense, i found it because cory doctorow boosted it, so, in a way, i am providing the original source here.

please argue. please do not remove.

  • @cyd
    link
    English
    44 months ago

    Agreed. I would also argue that trained model weights are not copyrightable.

    • @kromem
      link
      English
      14 months ago

      They aren’t.

      Courts have already ruled that copyright requires human creation, and weights are not decided by humans but by the training algorithms.

      • @cyd
        link
        English
        04 months ago

        I didn’t know it was already settled law. But in that case, why are models like llama still released under licenses? If they are non-copyrightable, licenses should be unenforceable and therefore irrelevant.

        • @kromem
          link
          English
          14 months ago

          The license is related to access.

          Basically it’s gated and not publicly available, and the only way to open the gate is to say “I promise not to do anything outside what you are limiting me to do.”

          A second person that gets access without agreeing to that can use the weights however they want (what copyright would relate to), but the person who gave them access to the weights would have been in breach of their agreement.

          So separate things with different scopes.

    • MxM111
      link
      fedilink
      -2
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      True. They are instead can be patented.