That said, Maffulli thinks, "Legally, it appears that GitHub is within its rights." However, it's not worth getting "lost in the legal weeds discussing if there is an open source license issue here or a copyright issue. This would miss the wider point. Clearly, there *is* a fairness issue that affects the whole of society, not just open source developers."

This academic-to-commercial pipeline abstracts away ownership of data models from their practical applications, a kind of data laundering where vast amounts of information are ingested, manipulated, and frequently relicensed under an open-source license for commercial use.

We feel that there is a balance to be struck between maximizing access and use of LLMs on the one hand, and mitigating the risks associated with use of these powerful models, on the other hand, which could bring about harm and a negative impact on society. The fact that a software license is deemed "open" ( e.g. under an "open source" license ) does not inherently mean that the use of the licensed material is going to be responsible. Whereas the principles of 'openness' and 'responsible use' may lead to friction, they are not mutually exclusive, and we strive for a balanced approach to their interaction.