A year ago, there were calls for Meta to stop referring to Llama 2 as “open source.” Since then, Meta has released new versions of Llama with new licensing terms, but these terms still do not meet the definition of open source. Llama 3.x cannot be considered open source by any means. Despite this, Meta falsely promotes Llama as “open source.” Now, there are calls for the public to urge Mark Zuckerberg and Yann LeCunn to modify Llama’s license to comply with open source standards.
According to the Free Software Foundation (FSF), the Llama 3.1 Community License Agreement fails to grant users basic freedoms:
- It fails to comply with Freedom 0, the freedom to use the model for any purpose.
- It fails to comply with point 5 of the Open Source Definition, as it discriminates against users.
- It fails to comply with point 6 of the Open Source Definition, as it restricts fields of endeavor.
These issues were already evident in the license for Llama 2, and the new license imposes even more restrictions, such as excluding individuals in the European Union from using the model.
Recently, some individuals have conflated criticisms of the open source AI definition with Meta’s misuse, raising concerns within the community.
Call to Action
In light of Meta’s attempts to redefine open source, there is a call for the open source community to unite against this behavior. The Open Source Initiative (OSI) will continue to resist open washing through public statements and educational efforts.
