ORD-2.2
An AI model provider combining it with other licences, under ORD 2.2
Trains, fine-tunes, or serves machine learning models commercially. Mixing the Work with GPL, Apache, MIT, or proprietary code. This resolves to the Canopy tier.
Tier
Owed
A quarterly Canopy Report. Section 5.1 imposes a royalty only when the Canopy Licensee makes Production Use.
Sections in play
1.8, 3.1, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 7.1
Who and what
The situation being resolved.
Actor
An AI model provider
Trains, fine-tunes, or serves machine learning models commercially.
over 2M USD
Situation
Combining it with other licences
Mixing the Work with GPL, Apache, MIT, or proprietary code.
Rulings
3 questions resolved against the text.
Which tier applies?
Canopy. Trains, fine-tunes, or serves machine learning models commercially. Section 5.2 reporting applies; the Section 5.1 royalty attaches when the Licensee makes Production Use and only to attributable revenue.
Sections 1.8, 3.1, 5.1
Is anything owed?
A quarterly Canopy Report. Section 5.1 imposes a royalty only when the Canopy Licensee makes Production Use.
Sections 5.1, 5.2
Can this be combined with copyleft?
Not with GPL or AGPL for a combined derivative work. Those licences forbid additional restrictions, and the royalty, Compute clause, and competing-offering restriction are additional restrictions. There is no automatic conversion that makes this disappear for current releases.
Sections 5.1, 6.1, 7.1
Cautions
What this situation gets wrong most often.
Section 8.3 of ORD requires a withdrawal of consent to propagate to any derivative you have distributed. Whether that is operationally achievable at depth is a published open question.
Same actor
Other situations for this party.
Non-normative. Where this and the licence text disagree, the licence text applies.