Post #2900937

2026-04-16 00:58 UTC

@cwebber@social.coop I think maybe you missed https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2026/mar/04/scotus-deny-cert-dc-circuit-thaler-appeal-llm-ai/ where #SFC analyzed that situation? Also, follow @ai_cases@mastodon.social & see the *firehose* of litigation on this & remember the “Work Based on the Program” issue under GPLv2 has still never been litigated directly but lots of cases about 100% proprietary software have bolstered GPL's strength. Big Content has legal battles with Big Tech on 100s of fronts rn. Yes, we're adrift on their sea, but the situation is not as dire as you imagine. #AI #LLW

Replies (2)

@dalias@hachyderm.io 2026-04-16 01:50

@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org @cwebber@social.coop @ai_cases@mastodon.social I'm confused what you mean by "dire". All LLM-emitted code being infringing would not be a "dire" outcome but the ideal one. Even if it does blow up in the faces of irresponsible maintainers who've let that infect their codebases and who now need to revert to the last non-compromised versions.

Open ##2900938
@cwebber@social.coop 2026-04-18 13:49

@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org @ossguy@fedi.copyleft.org @richardfontana@mastodon.social Continuing here, because it's the relevant subthread. I am sympathetic to choosing to narrow a topic. However, the post, in implying that we should start accepting partially AIgen contributions, inherently pulls in the topic of whether or not that is legally safe. Yes, I have read the previous Conservancy post about the existing cases. This partly contributes to my surprise and confusion about the post. Acknowledging that the plan is to have continued conversations and meetings about this, I still feel it is important to lay down my current concerns, even before such a meeting. I am leaving the "quality of contributions" and many other details out of here, and instead focusing on whether of not it is *safe to accept* contributions on copyright grounds at the moment, and what the implications of thinking on that are. (cotd)

Open ##2900939