Consider adding modelgo licenses

[pombredanne]

See https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/tree/main/MG_licenses
These are seldom used, but are about to be submitted to the OSI for review
We could only use rules for now.

[pombredanne]

Also check that less common licenses listed here are detected exactly https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/tree/main/license_raw ... these may be variants of existing licenses or new licenses:

• https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/blob/main/license_raw/CreativeML-OpenRAIL-M.txt
• https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/blob/main/license_raw/Llama2.txt
• https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/blob/main/license_raw/OPT-175B.txt
• https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/blob/main/license_raw/OpenRAIL%2B%2B.txt
• https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/blob/main/license_raw/BigScience-BLOOM-OpenRAIL-M.txt
• https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/blob/main/license_raw/BigScience-BLOOM-RAIL-1.0.txt

[DennisClark]

I think we should only use rules for now.

[armijnhemel]

I think we should only use rules for now.

For OpenRAIL i respectfully disagree, as it seems to be pushed as a good option by Hugginface:

https://huggingface.co/blog/open_rail

[armijnhemel]

https://github.com/Open-Future-Foundation/AI-model-licensing/blob/main/open-rail-m-license-variants.md

[hesa]

Regarding the license https://scancode-licensedb.aboutcode.org/opt-175b-2022.html in relation to https://github.com/Xtra-Computing/ModelGo/blob/main/license_raw/OPT-175B.txt (listed above):

• the latter has numbered sections (see diff example below)
• the references in the former are not correct because of this, e.g. The following sections survive termination of this License: 2 (Restrictions), 3 (Attribution), 4 (Disclaimers), but this is not our problem.
• Can we live with that (the section numbers) or do we need to add a new RULE for opt-175b-2022?

Diff example:

< MISCELLANEOUS
---
> 11. MISCELLANEOUS