[fgfm]

That last part feels very relatable to me: I've seen organizations who are mindful of the licenses of tools they use to avoid further problems, and others assuming that because it's closed source the problem won't ever arise.

License-wise, we're getting more and more transparency on the permissions that apply to the training sets of each OSS model. But I would argue that once we're passed that, developers are gonna raise their expectations:

- control over dependency multiplicity ~= "rewrite this using only a single linear algebra library with Apache 2 license" or even "rewrite this in pure Node JS"

- adding corresponding reference/license notice: the model copies/adapts a section of a library that requires copyright notice reproduction.

- transparency on the similarity with the source material if it was copied/adapted from somewhere else (even if the license allows this, this enters the realm of social courtesy/community codes)