{
  "id": 671070,
  "title": "Question on using Meta NLLB models under the winner license terms",
  "url": "/competitions/deep-past-initiative-machine-translation/discussion/671070",
  "author_name": "FX-6300",
  "post_date": "2026-01-31T01:34:06.565000",
  "votes": 4,
  "comment_count": 0,
  "views": 0,
  "content": "<p>Hi everyone — I’d like to ask about using Meta’s NLLB family in this competition.</p>\n<p>The rules say that winners must license their submission + code under CC‑BY 4.0 (OSI‑approved) and that it must not limit commercial use. NLLB models are distributed under a non‑commercial license (CC‑BY‑NC), so I’m unsure if using NLLB would be disallowed, or only disallowed for winning submissions.</p>\n<p>NLLB is a standard baseline for low‑resource translation and often performs very well. For example, this paper highlights its strong results in low‑resource settings: <a href=\"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.14423\" target=\"_blank\">https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.14423</a></p>\n<p>Could someone clarify the license implications?</p>\n<ul>\n<li>I’m specifically asking whether NLLB is acceptable for non‑winning final submissions—i.e., if you’re not in the prize tier—given the winner‑only relicensing requirement.</li>\n<li>Or is any use of NLLB prohibited given the winner license clause?</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Thanks for any guidance!</p>",
  "messages": [
    {
      "id": 3399570,
      "postDate": "2026-01-31T01:34:06.567Z",
      "content": "<p>Hi everyone — I’d like to ask about using Meta’s NLLB family in this competition.</p>\n<p>The rules say that winners must license their submission + code under CC‑BY 4.0 (OSI‑approved) and that it must not limit commercial use. NLLB models are distributed under a non‑commercial license (CC‑BY‑NC), so I’m unsure if using NLLB would be disallowed, or only disallowed for winning submissions.</p>\n<p>NLLB is a standard baseline for low‑resource translation and often performs very well. For example, this paper highlights its strong results in low‑resource settings: <a href=\"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.14423\" target=\"_blank\">https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.14423</a></p>\n<p>Could someone clarify the license implications?</p>\n<ul>\n<li>I’m specifically asking whether NLLB is acceptable for non‑winning final submissions—i.e., if you’re not in the prize tier—given the winner‑only relicensing requirement.</li>\n<li>Or is any use of NLLB prohibited given the winner license clause?</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Thanks for any guidance!</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "Hi everyone — I’d like to ask about using Meta’s NLLB family in this competition.\n\nThe rules say that winners must license their submission + code under CC‑BY 4.0 (OSI‑approved) and that it must not limit commercial use. NLLB models are distributed under a non‑commercial license (CC‑BY‑NC), so I’m unsure if using NLLB would be disallowed, or only disallowed for winning submissions.\n\nNLLB is a standard baseline for low‑resource translation and often performs very well. For example, this paper highlights its strong results in low‑resource settings: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.14423\n\nCould someone clarify the license implications?\n\n+ I’m specifically asking whether NLLB is acceptable for non‑winning final submissions—i.e., if you’re not in the prize tier—given the winner‑only relicensing requirement.\n+ Or is any use of NLLB prohibited given the winner license clause?\n\nThanks for any guidance!",
      "votes": 4
    }
  ],
  "comments": [],
  "raw_markdown_by_id": {
    "3399570": "Hi everyone — I’d like to ask about using Meta’s NLLB family in this competition.\n\nThe rules say that winners must license their submission + code under CC‑BY 4.0 (OSI‑approved) and that it must not limit commercial use. NLLB models are distributed under a non‑commercial license (CC‑BY‑NC), so I’m unsure if using NLLB would be disallowed, or only disallowed for winning submissions.\n\nNLLB is a standard baseline for low‑resource translation and often performs very well. For example, this paper highlights its strong results in low‑resource settings: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.14423\n\nCould someone clarify the license implications?\n\n+ I’m specifically asking whether NLLB is acceptable for non‑winning final submissions—i.e., if you’re not in the prize tier—given the winner‑only relicensing requirement.\n+ Or is any use of NLLB prohibited given the winner license clause?\n\nThanks for any guidance!"
  }
}