Wan on marking, and what the weights repository does not ask
This is the one cell in the record filled from two readings of two different pages, and the second reading is the finding. Hosted callers inherit a flag. Whoever downloaded the weights inherits nothing. As of 2026-09-22.
| Point | What the record holds |
|---|---|
| Article 50(2), machine-readable marking | Not documented in the API reference; the open terms ask nothing either |
| Read from | An API reference, and separately a model repository |
| What it does not settle | Whether anything is written into the container unsaid |
Inclusion rule. One cell of this generator's entry, quoted from the page the entry names. Coverage, commentary and third-hand summaries are not admitted, in either direction. Order. Fixed order: the cell, the page it came off, then the limit on reading it.
1Published weights change who the provider duty has to reach
A hosted interface is a single point through which every caller passes. Add a parameter, change a default, and the behaviour of everybody's output moves at once. That is a place where a marking obligation can actually be implemented.
Weights that have been downloaded are not that. They run on somebody else's hardware, on their schedule, with whatever code they wrote around them, and no later decision by the original team reaches them. The marking question follows the weights, and the terms they travel under are the only instrument that could carry it.
2A permissive licence is silent by design, not by oversight
The repository terms were read for any requirement on a downstream operator to mark what comes out, and none was found. That is not an omission the way a pricing page's omission is: broad permission is the whole point of publishing weights under those terms.
So the cell records a silence of a different kind, and the record keeps it separate from the ordinary sort. One is a page that had no reason to raise the subject. This one is a document whose purpose is to raise as few requirements as possible.
3The exemption in the paragraph does not help here
The marking duty carves out assistive standard editing that does not substantially alter its input. Running a text prompt through a video model is not that, on any reading, so the exemption is not where this case goes.
Where it goes instead is the question of who the provider is when weights are public, and that is a legal question this register does not answer. What it can do is record that the two pages were read, on the dates given, and that neither of them addressed marking on the way out.
- 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
4Sources
Wording taken from the text-to-video API reference at alibabacloud.com, consulted 2026-09-22. All four rows for this generator sit on Alibaba Wan; the same column across every entry is read down on What it asks for. Filed beside it: SceneMixer on a mark at compositing, Pika on a mark the plan removes.