I'm not sure OCV gets to decide any of this. Just like I don't think OSI trying to be the sole dictator of the term "Open Source" works out long term. My opinion is always received controversially about things like this, but terms evolve to meet the common usage by the people. If people are calling this "Open Source", and there are more people who want to call this "Open Source", than people who don't; unless you intend to legally bar them from using the term, with actual action, like a lawsuit or something then eventually this will will also be encompassed by the term "Open Source" as people know it like it or not.
Yes I know this term is currently defined explicitly by OSI, no I don't think language prescriptivism wins out regardless how hard they try with it, and since I haven't seen any of the hundreds of quasi Open Source, but not really, companies get dragged to court over usage of the term, this is all toothless complaining in my view.
As to their actual point, I might actually agree with them if it were only the weights being shared. In most cases the configuration is also shared which allows popular frameworks to instantiate the model and then execute it for either inference or further training making the release fully suitable for modification and rerelease. I don't need the exact implementation of FlashAttention they used if I can load the model into Huggingface and use theirs, or mine or whatever.
Edit: This obviously doesn't apply to the models who have restrictions placed on usage just in case people think I mean every instance of sharing a model. Those are obviously restricted use and I agree it muddies the term.
Yes I know this term is currently defined explicitly by OSI, no I don't think language prescriptivism wins out regardless how hard they try with it, and since I haven't seen any of the hundreds of quasi Open Source, but not really, companies get dragged to court over usage of the term, this is all toothless complaining in my view.
As to their actual point, I might actually agree with them if it were only the weights being shared. In most cases the configuration is also shared which allows popular frameworks to instantiate the model and then execute it for either inference or further training making the release fully suitable for modification and rerelease. I don't need the exact implementation of FlashAttention they used if I can load the model into Huggingface and use theirs, or mine or whatever.
Edit: This obviously doesn't apply to the models who have restrictions placed on usage just in case people think I mean every instance of sharing a model. Those are obviously restricted use and I agree it muddies the term.