<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>I like the idea of addressing AI issues within copyleft-next. AI
is the most important dilemma we all face here.<br>
<br>
That "Training Public License" seems to have a potential flaw by
my first read. It says " you must release all resulting models,
weights, and related code under the GPLv3 or later" but what does
"release" mean? There's no Affero-type clause, so keeping the AI
running on private servers even if giving others access might not
count. And without anything specific about "release", it doesn't
say to whom. It doesn't say that it must be published and
accessible to anyone in the general public. On the opposite end,
"release" mandates could suggest that every single iteration of
the AI must be published, which is infeasible.<br>
<br>
In order to deal with the issue of copyleft code used in AI
training, I imagine a need for more clarity, as in how GPLv3
family describes "convey" but furthermore also clarifying when
what is conveyed to whom.<br>
<br>
I will share a related perspective on the big-picture in that
other new thread on copyleft overall<br>
<br>
Cheers,</p>
<p>Aaron<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/11/25 7:31, Ben Cotton wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJox116GJQtWTUCZVq94=oo-ajVwAKyZgUHy=heukMQnrnJZLA@mail.gmail.com">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 4:01 AM Vasileios Valatsos <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:me@aethrvmn.gr"><me@aethrvmn.gr></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
I apologize in advance for opening what is, in my regard, a giant can of
worms.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
It's a conversation that we can't avoid. Credit to you for standing up. :-)
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">I wonder if (a) this would make sense in copyleft-next, (b) if it even
belongs in the conversation, (c) if there is a better way to tackle this.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
Would this be field of use discrimination? I think it would, and would
therefore violate FSF Freedom 0 and OSD criteria 6. That would render
copyleft-next neither Open Source nor Free in the capital-letter sense
of the terms.
More theoretically, I'm a big fan of "don't make rules you can't/won't
enforce." If you release something under the TPL and I decide to use
it to train an AI model, how will you know? bkuhn will correct me if
I'm wrong, but that would seem to be one challenge in GPL enforcement
in the traditional software arena. At least with traditional software,
there's typically some external evidence that a project was used in
violation of its license. I'm not sure there's a good way to detect it
in an LLM unless I make my training data public (which I would not if
I were intending to violate the license).
I'm not suggesting we stick our heads in the sand, but large language
models are a complex problem from a variety of legal (I say as
not-a-lawyer), ethical, practical, etc standpoints. I don't see a
clear way forward to addressing them in a license like copyleft-next
at this point.
--
Ben Cotton (he/him)
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
_______________________________________________
next mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:next@lists.copyleft.org">next@lists.copyleft.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.copyleft.org/mailman/listinfo/next">https://lists.copyleft.org/mailman/listinfo/next</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>