kyutai

/

moshika-vis-pytorch-bf16

like 56

Follow

Kyutai 749

Hi, I'd like to report a License Conflict in kyutai/moshika-vis-pytorch-bf16. I noticed this model was fine-tuned from google/paligemma2-3b-pt-448, which comes with Google's Gemma License. But the thing is, kyutai/moshika-vis-pytorch-bf16 is being shared under CC-BY-4.0, and that might not be compatible with Google's license, which prohibit sublicensing and require downstream users to inherit the same use restrictions."

⚠️ Key violations of Gemma license terms:

Section 3.1 – Distribution and Redistribution:
  • Must include a copy of the Gemma License when distributing any derivative
  • Must provide a "NOTICE" file with the text:
    "Gemma is provided under and subject to the Gemma Terms of Use found at ai.google.dev/gemma/terms"
  • Must pass along the use restrictions from Section 3.2 as enforceable terms
  • Any additional license terms (like CC-BY) must NOT conflict with the Gemma License

Section 3.2 – Use Restrictions:
  • Must not use the model for any prohibited purposes
  • Must comply with applicable laws and Google’s Prohibited Use Policy

Section 2.2 – Use Terms:
  • Usage is only allowed “in accordance with the terms of this Agreement”

On the other hand, CC-BY-4.0 allows:

• Redistribution and modification under any terms (including permissive or proprietary), provided attribution is preserved
• Sublicensing, including incorporating into projects under different licenses
• No requirement to include upstream license terms, usage restrictions, or "NOTICE" files

Here's the thing I'm seeing - the original Gemma License has much stricter rules about redistribution and reuse. And you can't really just override those original restrictions by applying a more permissive license like CC-BY-4.0 on top. It's like trying to make something that was originally locked down suddenly completely open - but the underlying license terms are still there, even if someone tries to make it more permissive later.

So I'm thinking there might be a licensing conflict here that needs to be sorted out.

🔹 Suggestion:

1. It’s probably a good idea to revise the licensing details to better reflect the Gemma terms, including:

• Adding a copy of the Gemma License to the repository or model card

• Including a “NOTICE” file with the required statement:

  “Gemma is provided under and subject to the Gemma Terms of Use found at ai.google.dev/gemma/terms”

• Making it clear in the model card that this is a derivative of a Gemma model, and that it inherits the same use restrictions (e.g., no commercial use, no sublicensing, etc.)

2. Maybe we can reconsider using CC-BY-4.0 here — since it permits commercial use and sublicensing, it might send the wrong signal to downstream users.
Switching to the Gemma License would help reduce potential confusion about redistribution rights and downstream usage conditions.

Thanks for your attention!