Thread

Qwen Image 2.1

740 points · 199 comments · jmillikin

jfoster · 1789913791 · focus · HN ↗
A lot of the previous Qwen models seem to have used Apache licenses, among others:
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qwen#List_of_models" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qwen#List_of_models
Unfortunately, it looks like this model is using a much more restrictive license:
<a href="https://github.com/QwenLM/Qwen-Image-2.1/blob/main/LICENSE" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/QwenLM/Qwen-Image-2.1/blob/main/LICENSE
1. unrented7977 · 1789915980 · focus · HN ↗
  I'm willing to bet a nonzero amount of its training material is GPL, so I'll treat it as GPL licensed instead and use it however the fuck I want.
  If AI labs get to ignore licenses, so do we.
  1. user43928 · 1789917820 · focus · HN ↗
    It's not going to matter unless you plan to commercially deploy the model, as far as I see.
    If you were to generate outputs for commercial use, I think it would still violate this research license, but it's not like they are going to know, are they?
    That said, I am disappointed that the model is not actually open-weights as I expected based on the headline.
    CamperBob2 · 1789922012 · focus · HN ↗
    It's not going to matter unless you plan to commercially deploy the model, as far as I see.
    It's not going to matter then, either. What are they going to do, sue me for copyright infringement?
    KeplerBoy · 1789922410 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes? If you deploy the model and provide it on Openrouter (or elsewhere) you better have a license.
    CamperBob2 · 1789922541 · focus · HN ↗
    No need to deploy it publicly. It's 7B, it'll run on a 3090.
    KeplerBoy · 1789922799 · focus · HN ↗
    You talked about commercially deploying it. Of course nobody cares what you are doing on your own hardware for fun.
    CamperBob2 · 1789923237 · focus · HN ↗
    Usually the way the licenses are interpreted, if I run it myself and use it to generate $X million in revenue in my own business, I'm subject to the license. In this case, the license seems to cover any commercial usage at all, which would certainly include self-hosting for internal business purposes.
    Why even bother demanding such terms? Release the weights or don't release the weights, but this is silly. No one is going to pay them to run or host a 7B static image model.
    nozzlegear · 1789927124 · focus · HN ↗
    Why not? If it's cheap enough, and presuming I had any reason to use an image model, I'd consider paying for it on OpenRouter over hosting it myself.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.