Please see here:
where person claims “This Llama-3.2-Taiwan open-source project” – how to counter such claims?
The OSI’s role is to maintain the “Open Source Definition” and approve licenses that qualify as Open Source. Criticizing licenses that are clearly not Open Source is not one of the organization’s main responsibilities. Of course, if too many egregious examples start popping up, I believe the OSI may need to issue some kind of statement. But for the OSI to deal with each individual case, it’s probably too small an organization to do so.
I’ve often argued that the Llama license is entirely different from Open Source and is also extremely dangerous. However, here in Japan, many people seem to think I’m merely complaining that Llama doesn’t comply with the OSI definition. This does nothing to convey the dangers of Llama. Therefore, I’m currently writing an article that clearly separates two perspectives: “Does the Llama model meet Open Source standards?” and “Why is the Llama license dangerous as a EULA?” I should be able to publish this for a Japanese audience by next week.
If there aren’t many articles looking at it from these angles, I’ll translate and publish mine in English too.
When you finish the article, please if possible, make one version in English after Japanese.
In this case, I am not saying that OSI should criticize third party proprietary licenses.
I am saying that on that link they clearly advertise it as “open source” while it is not.
Hugging Face and LLM related articles are full of wrong classification of what is open source, and it all comes due to deceptful advertising of some larger companies.
Though it is good to see Microsoft, IBM, Alibaba Group, Paul Allen, how they are making free software LLM. Thow there is little clarity on HuggingFace.
Perhaps if Hugging Face begins to respect the OSI definition, at the very least we’ll see fewer instances of terms being misused on their platform. That said, they likely have their own distinct perspective, though I’m not sure exactly what that might be.
Long ago, GitHub wasn’t a site that particularly respected the concept of Open Source. In fact, much of the code on their site was unlicensed. Several years later, many of the projects on GitHub came to adopt Open Source licenses. I hope the same will happen with Hugging Face, and to help make that happen, we simply need to keep sharing accurate information.
1 Like