🚩 Report: Illegal or restricted content
disallowed under HF ToS as it has nudify model.
Good job reporting! While you're at it, could you report this model (https://civitai.com/models/639094) as well? it breaks the Flux license in many ways.
The LoRA model titled "/r/normalnudes for Flux" (hereafter "the LoRA") is a "Derivative" of the FLUX.1 [dev] Model as defined by the license. Its creation and distribution, as described by its author, constitute multiple, clear, and significant violations of the governing FLUX.1 [dev] Non-Commercial License v1.1.1 (hereafter "the License").
The primary violations fall into three categories:
- Violation of Distribution Terms: The author fails to include the required license text and attribution notice, and instead provides their own conflicting and overly permissive license terms.
- Violation of Content and Use Restrictions: The LoRA is trained on and designed to produce content that falls under several restricted categories, most notably creating a high risk of generating non-consensual intimate images and infringing on the rights of individuals in the training data.
- Violation of Content Safeguard Requirements: The LoRA's purpose is to generate explicit content, yet the author provides no indication that they have implemented the content filtering or review processes mandated by the License.
1. Gross Violation of Distribution Terms (License Section 3)
This is the most direct and unambiguous violation. The author of the LoRA has completely disregarded the mandatory conditions for distributing a Derivative work.
Violation of Section 3.a: This section requires the distributor to:
"...make available a copy of this License to third-party recipients... and specify that any rights to use the FLUX.1 [dev] Models and/or Derivatives shall be directly granted by Company to said third-party recipients pursuant to this License;"
The author explicitly contradicts this by stating: "Do whatever you want with this model, as long as it's moral and right. I don't control you." This statement replaces the required FLUX.1 License with a vague, personal, and unenforceable guideline, failing to pass on the original terms and conditions.
Violation of Section 3.b: This section requires the prominent display of a specific Attribution Notice. The provided description for the LoRA contains no such notice, which is a direct breach of the distribution requirements.
Violation of Section 3.c.ii: This section states that any terms imposed on third parties must not conflict with the FLUX.1 License. The author's statement "Do whatever you want" directly conflicts with the License's core "Non-Commercial Purpose" restriction (Section 1.c), its prohibition on military and surveillance use (Section 4.a), and other critical limitations. It effectively encourages users to ignore the original license.
2. Violation of Use and Content Restrictions (License Section 4)
The very nature of the LoRA—being trained on 70,000 images of naked people from a public internet forum—contravenes the specific restrictions on use and content generation.
Violation of Section 4.a.vii: This section prohibits the use of the model:
"...to generate unlawful content, including child sexual abuse material, or non-consensual intimate images;"
The LoRA is trained on images from "/r/normalnudes." While the subreddit may have rules regarding consent for posting, the author of the LoRA cannot guarantee that all 70,000 images were posted with the explicit and informed consent of the subjects for the purpose of being used as AI training data. Furthermore, the LoRA can be used to generate new, photorealistic images of people without their consent, which falls squarely into the category of "non-consensual intimate images." The LoRA's entire purpose facilitates a prohibited activity.
Violation of Section 4.a.v: This section prohibits using the model:
"...in any manner that infringes, misappropriates, or otherwise violates... any third party’s legal rights, including rights of publicity or “digital replica” rights,"
Training a model on 70,000 images of identifiable or semi-identifiable individuals without their permission is a potential violation of their right of publicity. The model learns their likenesses to "improve anatomical understanding," which means it is creating a "digital replica" of their features. This is a clear infringement of the rights the License explicitly seeks to protect.
3. Violation of Content Safeguard Requirements (License Section 2.e)
This section places a clear responsibility on the user to manage the model's output.
- Violation of Section 2.e.(i): This section requires the user to either:
The author of the LoRA gives no indication that any such filters or review processes are in place. In fact, the LoRA is designed specifically to generate a type of content that safety filters on a base model would typically be designed to prevent. By creating and distributing a tool to bypass these implicit safeguards without adding new ones, the author is in direct violation of this clause."(A) implement and maintain content filtering measures... to prevent the creation... of unlawful or infringing content... or (B) ensure Output undergoes review for unlawful or infringing content before public or non-public distribution..."
4. Enabling Prohibited Commercial Use (License Section 2.b)
The License is explicitly for "Non-Commercial Purposes" only.
- Violation of Section 2.b: This section states:
By distributing the LoRA with the instruction "Do whatever you want with this model," the author is implicitly granting recipients permission to use it for commercial purposes, which the author has no right to grant. This action directly facilitates the violation of the core non-commercial tenet of the License."You may only access, use, Distribute, or create Derivatives of the FLUX.1 [dev] Model or Derivatives for Non-Commercial Purposes."
The creator of the "/r/normalnudes for Flux" LoRA has demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding or a willful disregard for the terms of the FLUX.1 [dev] Non-Commercial License v1.1.1. The distribution method is in direct violation of Section 3, and the model's subject matter and training data create an unacceptable risk of violating the content and use-case restrictions outlined in Section 4.
Under the terms of the License (Section 8.a), "This License will automatically terminate upon any breach by you of the terms of this License." Therefore, the author's right to use, modify, or distribute the FLUX.1 [dev] Model and its Derivatives is void.
i think it's sweet how much time you spent learning about me yesterday. you're my number one fan!
Please do some self reflection.
You have chosen to backstab the entire lora training community, the community that is the entire userbase of simpletuner.
How do you think this will affect your reputation?
Why would someone choose to train a lora with your trainer when there's a risk you'll just take it down?
Furthermore, you report NSFW loras for breaking licenses, yet have yourself trained NSFW license breaking loras that are currently still up.
I'm genuinely curious, what is your goal here? what is your plan?
You have chosen to backstab the entire lora training community, the community that is the entire userbase of simpletuner.
Are they giving him money? How does the good will of the community help him?
This bghira c*nt again!
@lunarflu this one got missed
The only "missed" item is your brain. It seems to be "missed" completely, together with any trace of personality or charisma.
Good job reporting! While you're at it, could you report this model (https://civitai.com/models/639094) as well? it breaks the Flux license in many ways.
The LoRA model titled "/r/normalnudes for Flux" (hereafter "the LoRA") is a "Derivative" of the FLUX.1 [dev] Model as defined by the license. Its creation and distribution, as described by its author, constitute multiple, clear, and significant violations of the governing FLUX.1 [dev] Non-Commercial License v1.1.1 (hereafter "the License").
The primary violations fall into three categories:
- Violation of Distribution Terms: The author fails to include the required license text and attribution notice, and instead provides their own conflicting and overly permissive license terms.
- Violation of Content and Use Restrictions: The LoRA is trained on and designed to produce content that falls under several restricted categories, most notably creating a high risk of generating non-consensual intimate images and infringing on the rights of individuals in the training data.
- Violation of Content Safeguard Requirements: The LoRA's purpose is to generate explicit content, yet the author provides no indication that they have implemented the content filtering or review processes mandated by the License.
1. Gross Violation of Distribution Terms (License Section 3)
This is the most direct and unambiguous violation. The author of the LoRA has completely disregarded the mandatory conditions for distributing a Derivative work.
Violation of Section 3.a: This section requires the distributor to:
"...make available a copy of this License to third-party recipients... and specify that any rights to use the FLUX.1 [dev] Models and/or Derivatives shall be directly granted by Company to said third-party recipients pursuant to this License;"
The author explicitly contradicts this by stating: "Do whatever you want with this model, as long as it's moral and right. I don't control you." This statement replaces the required FLUX.1 License with a vague, personal, and unenforceable guideline, failing to pass on the original terms and conditions.
Violation of Section 3.b: This section requires the prominent display of a specific Attribution Notice. The provided description for the LoRA contains no such notice, which is a direct breach of the distribution requirements.
Violation of Section 3.c.ii: This section states that any terms imposed on third parties must not conflict with the FLUX.1 License. The author's statement "Do whatever you want" directly conflicts with the License's core "Non-Commercial Purpose" restriction (Section 1.c), its prohibition on military and surveillance use (Section 4.a), and other critical limitations. It effectively encourages users to ignore the original license.
2. Violation of Use and Content Restrictions (License Section 4)
The very nature of the LoRA—being trained on 70,000 images of naked people from a public internet forum—contravenes the specific restrictions on use and content generation.
Violation of Section 4.a.vii: This section prohibits the use of the model:
"...to generate unlawful content, including child sexual abuse material, or non-consensual intimate images;"
The LoRA is trained on images from "/r/normalnudes." While the subreddit may have rules regarding consent for posting, the author of the LoRA cannot guarantee that all 70,000 images were posted with the explicit and informed consent of the subjects for the purpose of being used as AI training data. Furthermore, the LoRA can be used to generate new, photorealistic images of people without their consent, which falls squarely into the category of "non-consensual intimate images." The LoRA's entire purpose facilitates a prohibited activity.
Violation of Section 4.a.v: This section prohibits using the model:
"...in any manner that infringes, misappropriates, or otherwise violates... any third party’s legal rights, including rights of publicity or “digital replica” rights,"
Training a model on 70,000 images of identifiable or semi-identifiable individuals without their permission is a potential violation of their right of publicity. The model learns their likenesses to "improve anatomical understanding," which means it is creating a "digital replica" of their features. This is a clear infringement of the rights the License explicitly seeks to protect.
3. Violation of Content Safeguard Requirements (License Section 2.e)
This section places a clear responsibility on the user to manage the model's output.
- Violation of Section 2.e.(i): This section requires the user to either:
The author of the LoRA gives no indication that any such filters or review processes are in place. In fact, the LoRA is designed specifically to generate a type of content that safety filters on a base model would typically be designed to prevent. By creating and distributing a tool to bypass these implicit safeguards without adding new ones, the author is in direct violation of this clause."(A) implement and maintain content filtering measures... to prevent the creation... of unlawful or infringing content... or (B) ensure Output undergoes review for unlawful or infringing content before public or non-public distribution..."
4. Enabling Prohibited Commercial Use (License Section 2.b)
The License is explicitly for "Non-Commercial Purposes" only.
- Violation of Section 2.b: This section states:
By distributing the LoRA with the instruction "Do whatever you want with this model," the author is implicitly granting recipients permission to use it for commercial purposes, which the author has no right to grant. This action directly facilitates the violation of the core non-commercial tenet of the License."You may only access, use, Distribute, or create Derivatives of the FLUX.1 [dev] Model or Derivatives for Non-Commercial Purposes."
The creator of the "/r/normalnudes for Flux" LoRA has demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding or a willful disregard for the terms of the FLUX.1 [dev] Non-Commercial License v1.1.1. The distribution method is in direct violation of Section 3, and the model's subject matter and training data create an unacceptable risk of violating the content and use-case restrictions outlined in Section 4.
Under the terms of the License (Section 8.a), "This License will automatically terminate upon any breach by you of the terms of this License." Therefore, the author's right to use, modify, or distribute the FLUX.1 [dev] Model and its Derivatives is void.
Flux Dev's license has been updated. Your entire argument is based on out of date information.