Please make it truly Open Source or remove the misleading statements from the model card
First thank you for all the good efforts, and making many of your models truly free software. Just that this one here it is not.
Following incorrect statement is on the model card:
We present DeepSeek-Coder-V2, an open-source Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) code language model that achieves performance comparable to GPT4-Turbo in code-specific tasks.
This model claims to be "Open Source" while it is not.
The Open Source Definition – Open Source Initiative:
https://opensource.org/osd
What is Free Software? - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Analysis of the license by DeepSeek itself:
The DeepSeek License Agreement (Version 1.0, 23 October 2023) is not conformant to the principles of free software as defined by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) or the Open Source Initiative (OSI). Below is an analysis of why this license does not meet the criteria for free software:
1. Use-Based Restrictions (Section III, Paragraph 5 and Attachment A)
- The license imposes use-based restrictions on the model and its derivatives. These restrictions prohibit specific uses of the software, such as military use, generating false information, or discriminating against individuals or groups.
- Why this violates free software principles:
- Free Software Definition (FSD): The FSD states that users must have the freedom to use the software for any purpose, without restrictions. Use-based restrictions directly conflict with this principle.
- Open Source Definition (OSD): The OSD similarly requires that the license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor (e.g., military use, discrimination).
2. Copyleft-Like Requirements for Derivatives (Section III, Paragraph 4.a)
- The license requires that any derivative works must include the same use-based restrictions as the original license. This is similar to copyleft but goes beyond typical copyleft requirements by enforcing specific use restrictions.
- Why this violates free software principles:
- While copyleft licenses (e.g., GPL) require derivative works to be licensed under the same terms, they do not impose restrictions on how the software can be used. The DeepSeek License adds additional constraints that limit user freedom.
3. Remote Restriction of Usage (Section IV, Paragraph 7)
- The license grants DeepSeek the right to remotely restrict usage of the model if it violates the license terms.
- Why this violates free software principles:
- Free software ensures that users have unrestricted control over the software they use. Allowing the licensor to remotely restrict usage undermines this control and introduces a form of centralized authority over the software.
4. Trademark and Endorsement Restrictions (Section IV, Paragraph 8)
- The license prohibits the use of DeepSeek’s trademarks or suggesting endorsement by DeepSeek.
- Why this violates free software principles:
- While trademark restrictions are common in free software licenses, they must not interfere with the user's freedom to modify and distribute the software. The DeepSeek License does not explicitly address this balance, potentially creating ambiguity.
5. Disclaimer of Warranty and Limitation of Liability (Section IV, Paragraphs 10-11)
- The license disclaims all warranties and limits DeepSeek’s liability for damages arising from the use of the model.
- Why this is not necessarily a violation:
- Disclaimers of warranty and liability are common in free software licenses (e.g., MIT, GPL). However, they do not inherently conflict with free software principles.
6. Governing Law and Jurisdiction (Section IV, Paragraph 14)
- The license specifies that disputes will be governed by PRC (People's Republic of China) law and adjudicated in courts in Hangzhou, China.
- Why this is not necessarily a violation:
- Jurisdiction clauses are common in software licenses and do not inherently conflict with free software principles. However, they may create practical barriers for users outside the specified jurisdiction.
7. Output Ownership and Accountability (Section III, Paragraph 6)
- The license states that DeepSeek claims no rights to the output generated by the model but holds users accountable for the output and its subsequent uses.
- Why this is not necessarily a violation:
- This clause does not directly conflict with free software principles, as it pertains to the output rather than the software itself. However, it introduces additional legal responsibilities for users.
Conclusion:
The DeepSeek License Agreement is not conformant to free software principles due to its use-based restrictions, remote restriction of usage, and copyleft-like requirements for derivatives. These provisions limit the freedom to use, modify, and distribute the software without restriction, which are fundamental to the definition of free software.
If DeepSeek aims to align with free software principles, it would need to remove the use-based restrictions and ensure that users have unrestricted freedom to use the software for any purpose.