Example: the Stack Exchange data dump has a new access agreement, which states:
I understand that this file is being provided to me for my own use and for projects that do not include training a large language model (LLM), and that should I distribute this file for the purpose of LLM training, Stack Overflow reserves the right to decline to allow me access to future downloads of this data dump.
Does that condition ("for my own use and for projects that do not include training a large language model (LLM), and that should I distribute this file for the purpose of LLM training") only apply to the file, does the condition also apply to its content itself too? In other words, if one changes the content format and creates a new file, is one allowed to train LLMs on the content, or share the content? Note that the content itself is under CC BY-SA (at least, if accessed by browsing the website).
For additional context, consider that according to the site Terms of Service
You agree that any and all content, including without limitation any and all text, graphics, logos, tools, photographs, images, illustrations, software or source code, audio and video, animations, and product feedback (collectively, “Content”) that you provide to the public Network (collectively, “Subscriber Content”), is perpetually and irrevocably licensed to Stack Overflow on a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive basis pursuant to Creative Commons licensing terms (CC BY-SA 4.0), and you grant Stack Overflow the perpetual and irrevocable right and license to access, use, process, copy, distribute, export, display and to commercially exploit such Subscriber Content, even if such Subscriber Content has been contributed and subsequently removed by you as reasonably necessary to
all "Subscriber Content" is licensed under two different licenses:
- a version of the Creative Common license (CC BY-SA 4.0 for newer content, previous versions for older posts)
- a secondary license that Stack Exchange grants to itself.
Based on the Creative Common FAQS page I find hard to understand exactly what the company can or can't do to implement additional artificial restriction on the distribution of the "Subscriber Content". More specifically, I don't get if the company can claim to be distributing the dumps under their own license - thus being freed by any restriction the CC would cause them - while the actual content is still attached to the Creative Common.