Who marks the output when the weights are public
A hosted interface is one place a marking duty can be implemented. Downloaded weights are not, and the only instrument that could carry the obligation is the terms they travel under. As of 2026-09-12.
| Point | Where it sits | What the record holds |
|---|---|---|
| The hosted route | One API reference | An optional boolean that adds a corner mark, defaulting to false |
| The weights route | One model repository | Read for a marking requirement; nothing of the kind found |
| Who could still decide | Neither page | Only whoever is running the weights on their own hardware |
Inclusion rule. The single entry in this record whose model weights are published as well as hosted. No other entry was read for a licence, because no other publishes weights. Order. The hosted route first, then the open one.
1A hosted interface is somewhere an obligation can land
One interface, one default, one decision that moves everybody's output at once. Whatever the marking duty asks for, a hosted product is a place it can be implemented, verified and changed.
Published weights are none of those things. They run on other hardware, under other code, on somebody else's schedule, and no announcement or parameter from the original team ever reaches them.
2Permissive terms are silent by design
The repository was read for any requirement on a downstream operator to mark what comes out, and nothing was found. Broad permission is the point of publishing weights that way, so this is not an oversight.
The record keeps it separate from the ordinary sort of silence. A pricing page that skips a subject had no reason to raise it; a licence that asks for nothing is a document whose purpose is to ask for as little as possible.
3The exemption in the paragraph does not reach this case
The marking duty carves out assistive standard editing that does not substantially alter its input. Running a prompt through a video model is not that on any reading, so the exemption is not where the question goes.
Where it goes instead is who counts as the provider once weights are public, which is a legal question this record does not answer. What it can do is record that both pages were read and what each one said.
- Alibaba WanNot stated in the instrument (as of 2026-09-12)what the Apache 2.0 open-weights terms ask about marking output
- Article 50(2)Machine-readable marking does not apply to assistive standard editing that does not substantially alter the inputsecond exemption
- Article 50(2)Providers must mark synthetic audio, image, video and text in a machine-readable formatincluding general-purpose AI systems
- Alibaba Wan (alibabacloud.com)An optional watermark parameter adds a mark in the lower-right corner with the text AI Generateda video generation API
4Sources
Article wording from AI Act Explorer, Article 50; vendor statements from the pages listed on each generator entry. Both read 2026-09-12. Related: What an omission proves, Two layers at once, Does anyone say why.