Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I wonder how they arrived at Creative Commons' CC-BY-NC as the license. These licenses are not meant for code but for artwork, Creative Commons actually discourage the use of their licenses for code [1]. I recently noticed the same with the FastPhotoStyle code [2] by nvidia, so I'm wondering if there is something that draws their legal departments to this license?

[1]: https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-comm...

[2]: https://github.com/NVIDIA/FastPhotoStyle




If the dataset it was trained on is CC-BY-NC, I'm pretty sure the model also has to be CC-BY-NC. However I think this is not respected, or even considered by most people.

I'd go with limiting how competitors can use it as the main deciding factor.


<cynical thought>Note that two of the three team members are from Facebook...


I'd never thought of this. It is a very interesting idea.


Hmmm... I guess it's been selected that way because it'd covevr the model files and the datasets. It's not about the code as much as the datasets/models.


They want to be the only people who can sell this where the real money is: military and law enforcement.


discourage people that aren't just hobbyists messing around from using it?


yeah, that's what I came up with myself. But I thought a main point, if not the whole point of publishing code for these companies was to appeal to developer-types who are fond of real open source/science. And those should be able to tell the difference...

It's a bit like allowing your scientists to publish their research, but only in prohibitively expensive and thus exceedingly niche journals.




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: