[jph00]

Miqu is a leaked model -- no license is provided to use it. Yi 34B doesn't allow commercial use. Deepseed 33B isn't much good at stuff outside of coding.

So it's fair to say that DBRX is the leading general purpose model that can be used commercially.

[ok_dad]

Model weights are just constants in a mathematical equation, they aren’t copyrightable. It’s questionable whether licenses to use them only for certain purposes are even enforceable. No human wrote the weights so they aren’t a work of art/authorship by a human. Just don’t use their services, use the weights at home on your machines so you don’t bypass some TOS.

[wongarsu]

Photographs aren't human-made either, yet they are copyrightable. I agree that both the letter and the spirit of copyright law are in favor of models not being copyrightable, but it will take years until there's a court ruling either way. Until then proceed with caution and expect rights holders to pretend like copyright does apply. Not that they will come after your home setup either way.

[Zuiii]

Photos involve creativity. Photos that don't involve creativity aren't usually considered copyrightable by the courts (hence why all copyright cases I followed include arguments that establish why creativity was a material to creating the work).

Weights, on the other hand, are a product of a purely mechanical process. Sure, the process itself required creativity as did the composition of data, but the creation of the weights themselves do not.

Model weights are effectively public domain data according to the criteria outlined in statement issued by the US copyright office a year ago: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05...

[jMyles]

This only applies to projects whose authors seek to comply with the whims of a particular jurisdiction.

Surely there are plenty of project prospects - even commercial in nature - which don't have this limitation.