- Gemma License (danger) is not Free Software and is not Open Source
- References to Free Software definitions
Gemma License (danger) is not Free Software and is not Open Source
The Gemma Terms of Use and Prohibited Use Policy govern the use, modification, and distribution of Google’s Gemma machine learning model and its derivatives. While Gemma is available for public use, it does not conform to Free Software or Open Source principles as defined by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) or Open Source Initiative (OSI). The terms impose significant restrictions, including prohibited use cases (e.g., illegal, harmful, or malicious activities), requirements to enforce Google’s use restrictions on downstream users, and limitations on redistribution and derived works. Additionally, the terms do not guarantee access to source code or the freedom to use the software for any purpose, and they include broad disclaimers of warranty and liability. As a result, Gemma is a proprietary model with limited permissions, rather than a truly free or open-source software offering.
References
- Gemma License: https://ai.google.dev/gemma/terms
- Gemma Prohibited Use Policy: https://ai.google.dev/gemma/prohibited_use_policy
Gemma Large Language Model (LLM) is not Free Software
The Gemma Terms of Use and Prohibited Use Policy outline the conditions under which users can access, use, and distribute the Gemma machine learning model and its derivatives. While Gemma is made available for public use, it does not conform to the principles of Free Software or Open Source as defined by organizations like the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and the Open Source Initiative (OSI). Below is an explanation of how Gemma’s terms deviate from these principles:
1. Free Software Principles (FSF)
The Free Software Foundation defines free software based on four essential freedoms: - Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose. - Freedom 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish. - Freedom 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others. - Freedom 3: The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others.
How Gemma Deviates:
Restricted Use Cases: The Gemma Prohibited Use Policy imposes significant restrictions on how the model can be used. For example, users are prohibited from using Gemma for illegal, harmful, or malicious activities, as well as for generating certain types of content (e.g., sexually explicit content, violent extremism, etc.). These restrictions limit Freedom 0 (the freedom to use the software for any purpose).
No Guarantee of Freedom 1: While users can modify Gemma, the terms do not explicitly guarantee access to the source code or the ability to study and modify the model without restrictions. This is a key requirement for Free Software.
Redistribution Restrictions: Although users can redistribute Gemma and its derivatives, they must include specific notices and enforce the same use restrictions on downstream users. This limits Freedom 2 and Freedom 3, as users cannot freely redistribute the software without imposing Google’s terms on others.
2. Open Source Principles (OSI)
The Open Source Initiative defines open source software based on ten criteria, including:
Free Redistribution: The license must allow anyone to freely distribute the software.
Source Code Availability: The program must include source code and allow distribution in source code form.
Derived Works: The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the original software.
No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor: The license must not restrict use in specific fields (e.g., commercial use).
How Gemma Deviates:
Prohibited Use Policy: The Gemma Prohibited Use Policy restricts use in specific fields of endeavor, such as illegal activities, harmful content generation, and certain professional practices (e.g., unlicensed medical or legal advice). This violates the OSI principle of no discrimination against fields of endeavor.
Use Restrictions on Derivatives: Users who create derivatives of Gemma must enforce the same use restrictions on downstream users. This limits the freedom to distribute derived works under different terms, which is a key requirement for open source software.
No Explicit Source Code Requirement: The terms do not explicitly require Google to provide the source code for Gemma, which is a fundamental requirement for open source software.
Trademark Restrictions: The terms prohibit users from using Google’s trademarks or implying endorsement, which can limit the ability to freely redistribute the software without additional restrictions.
3. Additional Non-Conformities
Disclaimer of Warranty and Liability: The terms include a broad disclaimer of warranty and liability, which is common in proprietary software but not aligned with the spirit of open source or free software, where users are often granted more protections.
Google’s Control Over Updates: Google reserves the right to update Gemma and its terms at any time, which means users have no guarantee of continued access to the software under the same terms. This lack of permanence is inconsistent with the principles of free and open source software.
4. Conclusion
While Gemma is made available for public use and allows modification and distribution, its Prohibited Use Policy and Terms of Use impose significant restrictions that conflict with the principles of Free Software and Open Source. Specifically:
- It limits the freedom to use the software for any purpose.
- It imposes restrictions on redistribution and derived works.
- It does not guarantee access to source code or the ability to study and modify the software freely.
- It discriminates against specific fields of endeavor.
As a result, Gemma cannot be considered Free Software or Open Source under the definitions provided by the FSF and OSI. Instead, it is a proprietary model with limited permissions for public use and redistribution.
References to Free Software definitions
What is Free Software? - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
The Open Source Definition – Open Source Initiative: https://opensource.org/osd
Meta’s LLaMa 2 license is not Open Source – Open Source Initiative: https://opensource.org/blog/metas-llama-2-license-is-not-open-source