Clément Delangue defended AI open science and open source in his congressional testimony.

Judge as of 2023-06-27. True: Clément Delangue (Hugging Face CEO) gave congressional testimony on or before 2023-06-27 (e.g. to the House Science Committee on 22 June 2023), and his written or oral testimony argued in favour of open science and/or open-source AI. Mostly true: he testified and defended openness, but a minor detail is off (e.g. the exact committee or wording). Mixed: he testified, but open science/open source was only a small or ambiguous part of what he said. Mostly false: he testified but did not meaningfully advocate open science or open source, or the testimony was not before Congress (e.g. some other body). False: no such congressional testimony by Delangue took place on or before that date. Whether the defence was 'nice' is opinion and is not judged.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 [TO SUBMIT] Congressional Hearing Biography and Testimony Congress.gov (Written Testimony of Clement Delangue, Hugging Face) · 22 June 2023

   “We conduct our mission primarily through open-source and open-science, with our platform for hosting machine learning models and datasets and an infrastructure that supports research and resources to lower the barrier for all backgrounds to contribute to AI.”

2. E2 Full Committee Hearing - Artificial Intelligence: Advancing Innovation Towards the National Interest House Committee on Science, Space & Technology (Republicans) · 22 June 2023

   “Mr. Clement Delangue, Co-founder & CEO, HuggingFace”

3. E3 The Open-Source AI Imperative | Giskard Giskard · 29 June 2023

   “On June 22, 2023, the US Congress heard testimony from Hugging Face CEO, Clément Delangue.”

The House Science Committee hearing page lists Clément Delangue, Co-founder & CEO of Hugging Face, as a witness at the 22 June 2023 hearing on AI (E2), and Giskard confirms he testified to Congress that day (E3). His written testimony on Congress.gov says Hugging Face pursues its mission "primarily through open-source and open-science" and to "lower the barrier" for people to contribute to AI (E1). Giskard's account of the testimony is titled "The Open-Source AI Imperative" (E3), which supports reading the testimony as an argument for openness. The testimony took place before the claim date and argued for open science and open-source AI.