Re: [SUBMISSION] AI-MIT License 1 .0 — permissive license for AI-generated code
Nik <[email protected]> Fri, 13 Mar 2026 21:05:52 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.licenses.open-source.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CALoGuP02qhopr0+KtR_j08Fc-HHxzXY9yWX_EYyTEQKzkXg8Pw@mail.gmail.com> |
--===============2049218738059204070== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007b8c4d064cec8fe6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --0000000000007b8c4d064cec8fe6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Apologize, my mistake. I'm new to mailing lists and sent this to both addresses. This proposal is currently up for discussion, and if the community agrees, the final text can be submitted for review and registration after discussion, as I understand it. Nik =D0=BF=D1=82, 13 =D0=BC=D0=B0=D1=80. 2026=E2=80=AF=D0=B3. =D0=B2 18:32, Pam= ela Chestek <[email protected]>: > McCoy, I also have an email where it was submitted to license-review on > 3/12/26 at 5:30 pm PT? > > Pam > > On 3/13/2026 9:10 AM, McCoy Smith wrote: > > Nik: > > Are you requesting approval of this license by OSI, or just discussion of > the license? You've submitted to the license-discuss list, which is where > licenses are discussed, but does not result in the license being put > through the approval process. Your statement that you are "submitting" th= e > license "for consideration" is ambiguous. > > If you are seeking approval, you need to use the correct mailing list and > provide all the data required for a submission, which has not been done i= n > your e-mail below. > On 3/12/2026 4:20 AM, Nik wrote: > > Dear OSI License Review Committee, > > I am submitting the **AI-MIT License, Version 1.0** for consideration by > the Open Source Initiative. > > ## Summary > > The AI-MIT License is a permissive open-source license designed to addres= s > a genuine gap: existing licenses were written for human authors and handl= e > AI-generated code poorly, creating false implications about authorship an= d > copyright status. > > The license is deliberately minimal =E2=80=94 it preserves the structure = and > permissiveness of the MIT License while adding three targeted changes for > the AI context. > > ## The problem it solves > > 1. **False authorship implication.** When `Copyright (c) [year] [author]` > is applied to fully AI-generated code, it implies human authorship and > copyright that may not legally exist in most jurisdictions. > > 2. **No standard for disclosure.** There is no widely adopted mechanism > for disclosing whether code is AI-generated, AI-assisted, or > human-authored. This matters for supply-chain security, regulatory > compliance (EU AI Act), and intellectual honesty in open source. > > 3. **Undefined copyright status.** Fully autonomous AI-generated code (no > human creative input) is in a legal grey zone in most jurisdictions. A > license that claims copyright over it is at best misleading, at worst > invalid. > > ## What the license does differently from MIT > > The license adds one structural element (the Authorship Declaration) and > three conditions/clauses: > > **Authorship Declaration** =E2=80=94 a required checkbox at the top of th= e LICENSE > file with three modes: > - *Fully AI-generated*: no copyright claimed; code dedicated to public > domain > - *AI-assisted*: human-directed, AI-generated; standard copyright applies > - *Human-authored*: AI used as a tool only; identical to MIT posture > > **Condition 2 =E2=80=94 Transparency**: redistribution or use as AI train= ing data > must not misrepresent AI origin as human authorship. > > **Condition 3 =E2=80=94 No Copyright Claim**: for fully autonomous code, = explicit > public domain dedication (with a perpetual irrevocable fallback for > jurisdictions where public domain dedication is impossible). > > **Extended disclaimer**: adds three AI-specific disclaimers about trainin= g > data provenance, regulatory compliance, and jurisdictional limitations of > the authorship declaration. > > ## OSD compliance analysis > > 1. **Free Redistribution** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 no restriction on sale or = distribution > 2. **Source Code** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 no source restriction > 3. **Derived Works** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 modification and redistribution = permitted > 4. **Integrity of the Author's Source Code** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 no patch= -file > requirement; attribution preserved > 5. **No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups** =E2=9C=93 > 6. **No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor** =E2=9C=93 > 7. **Distribution of License** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 same rights apply to a= ll recipients > 8. **License Must Not Be Specific to a Product** =E2=9C=93 > 9. **License Must Not Restrict Other Software** =E2=9C=93 > 10. **License Must Be Technology-Neutral** =E2=9C=93 > > The Transparency condition (Condition 2) requires disclosure of AI origin > but does not restrict use in any field =E2=80=94 it is an attribution/hon= esty > requirement, not a field-of-endeavor restriction. > > ## SPDX identifier > > We are concurrently requesting the SPDX identifier `AI-MIT-1.0` through > the SPDX GitHub repository. > > ## Repository > > The full license text, README, translations, and supporting materials are > available at: > https://github.com/ai-mit-license/ai-mit-license > > ## A note on meta-context > > This license was initially drafted with AI assistance (Claude, Anthropic) > at the direction of a human. We believe this is appropriate and have > disclosed it in the repository. The license is itself an example of the > category of work it governs. > > We welcome feedback from the committee and the community at large. > > Respectfully, > Nik > > _______________________________________________ > The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not nece= ssarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Ope= n Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. > > License-discuss mailing [email protected]://li= sts.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > > > _______________________________________________ > The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not nece= ssarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Ope= n Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. > > License-discuss mailing [email protected]://li= sts.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > > > _______________________________________________ > The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not > necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by t= he > Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. > > License-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.openso= urce.org > --0000000000007b8c4d064cec8fe6 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">Apologize, my mistake. I'm new to mailing lists and se= nt this to both addresses.<br>This proposal is currently up for discussion,= and if the community agrees, the final text can be submitted for review an= d registration after discussion, as I understand it.<div><br></div><div>Nik= </div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir= =3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">=D0=BF=D1=82, 13 =D0=BC=D0=B0=D1=80. 2026=E2= =80=AF=D0=B3. =D0=B2 18:32, Pamela Chestek <<a href=3D"mailto:pamela.che= [email protected]">[email protected]</a>>:<br></div><block= quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1= px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><u></u> =20 =20 =20 <div> McCoy, I also have an email where it was submitted to license-review on 3/12/26 at 5:30 pm PT?<br> <br> Pam<br> <br> <div>On 3/13/2026 9:10 AM, McCoy Smith wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> =20 <p>Nik:</p> <p>Are you requesting approval of this license by OSI, or just discussion of the license? You've submitted to the license-discuss list, which is where licenses are discussed, but does not result in the license being put through the approval process. Your statement that you are "submitting" the lic= ense "for consideration" is ambiguous.</p> <p>If you are seeking approval, you need to use the correct mailing list and provide all the data required for a submission, which has not been done in your e-mail below.</p> <div>On 3/12/2026 4:20 AM, Nik wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> =20 <div dir=3D"ltr">Dear OSI License Review Committee,<br> <br> I am submitting the **AI-MIT License, Version 1.0** for consideration by the Open Source Initiative.<br> <br> ## Summary<br> <br> The AI-MIT License is a permissive open-source license designed to address a genuine gap: existing licenses were written for human authors and handle AI-generated code poorly, creating false implications about authorship and copyright status.<br> <br> The license is deliberately minimal =E2=80=94 it preserves the structure and permissiveness of the MIT License while adding three targeted changes for the AI context.<br> <br> ## The problem it solves<br> <br> 1. **False authorship implication.** When `Copyright (c) [year] [author]` is applied to fully AI-generated code, it implies human authorship and copyright that may not legally exist in most jurisdictions.<br> <br> 2. **No standard for disclosure.** There is no widely adopted mechanism for disclosing whether code is AI-generated, AI-assisted, or human-authored. This matters for supply-chain security, regulatory compliance (EU AI Act), and intellectual honesty in open source.<br> <br> 3. **Undefined copyright status.** Fully autonomous AI-generated code (no human creative input) is in a legal grey zone in most jurisdictions. A license that claims copyright over it is at best misleading, at worst invalid.<br> <br> ## What the license does differently from MIT<br> <br> The license adds one structural element (the Authorship Declaration) and three conditions/clauses:<br> <br> **Authorship Declaration** =E2=80=94 a required checkbox at the t= op of the LICENSE file with three modes:<br> - *Fully AI-generated*: no copyright claimed; code dedicated to public domain<br> - *AI-assisted*: human-directed, AI-generated; standard copyright applies<br> - *Human-authored*: AI used as a tool only; identical to MIT posture<br> <br> **Condition 2 =E2=80=94 Transparency**: redistribution or use as = AI training data must not misrepresent AI origin as human authorship.<br> <br> **Condition 3 =E2=80=94 No Copyright Claim**: for fully autonomou= s code, explicit public domain dedication (with a perpetual irrevocable fallback for jurisdictions where public domain dedication is impossible).<br> <br> **Extended disclaimer**: adds three AI-specific disclaimers about training data provenance, regulatory compliance, and jurisdictional limitations of the authorship declaration.<br> <br> ## OSD compliance analysis<br> <br> 1. **Free Redistribution** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 no restriction on = sale or distribution<br> 2. **Source Code** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 no source restriction<br> 3. **Derived Works** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 modification and redistr= ibution permitted<br> 4. **Integrity of the Author's Source Code** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80= =94 no patch-file requirement; attribution preserved<br> 5. **No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups** =E2=9C=93<br> 6. **No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor** =E2=9C=93<br> 7. **Distribution of License** =E2=9C=93 =E2=80=94 same rights ap= ply to all recipients<br> 8. **License Must Not Be Specific to a Product** =E2=9C=93<br> 9. **License Must Not Restrict Other Software** =E2=9C=93<br> 10. **License Must Be Technology-Neutral** =E2=9C=93<br> <br> The Transparency condition (Condition 2) requires disclosure of AI origin but does not restrict use in any field =E2=80=94 it = is an attribution/honesty requirement, not a field-of-endeavor restriction.<br> <br> ## SPDX identifier <div><br> We are concurrently requesting the SPDX identifier `AI-MIT-1.0` through the SPDX GitHub repository.<br> <br> ## Repository</div> <div><br> The full license text, README, translations, and supporting materials are available at: =C2=A0<br> <a href=3D"https://github.com/ai-mit-license/ai-mit-license" ta= rget=3D"_blank">https://github.com/ai-mit-license/ai-mit-license</a><br> <br> ## A note on meta-context</div> <div><br> This license was initially drafted with AI assistance (Claude, Anthropic) at the direction of a human. We believe this is appropriate and have disclosed it in the repository. The license is itself an example of the category of work it governs.<br> <br> We welcome feedback from the committee and the community at large.<br> <br> Respectfully, =C2=A0<font color=3D"#888888"><font color=3D"#888= 888"><br> Nik=C2=A0=C2=A0</font></font></div> </div> <br> <fieldset></fieldset> <pre>_______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necess= arily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open = Source Initiative will be sent from an <a href=3D"http://opensource.org" ta= rget=3D"_blank">opensource.org</a> email address. License-discuss mailing list <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">L= [email protected]</a> <a href=3D"http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lis= ts.opensource.org" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/li= stinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a> </pre> </blockquote> <br> <fieldset></fieldset> <pre>_______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necess= arily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open = Source Initiative will be sent from an <a href=3D"http://opensource.org" ta= rget=3D"_blank">opensource.org</a> email address. License-discuss mailing list <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">L= [email protected]</a> <a href=3D"http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lis= ts.opensource.org" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/li= stinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a> </pre> </blockquote> <br> </div> _______________________________________________<br> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necess= arily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open = Source Initiative will be sent from an <a href=3D"http://opensource.org" re= l=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.<br> <br> License-discuss mailing list<br> <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">L= [email protected]</a><br> <a href=3D"http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lis= ts.opensource.org" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.openso= urce.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><br> </blockquote></div> --0000000000007b8c4d064cec8fe6-- --===============2049218738059204070== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KVGhlIG9waW5p b25zIGV4cHJlc3NlZCBpbiB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFyZSB0aG9zZSBvZiB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBu b3QgbmVjZXNzYXJpbHkgdGhvc2Ugb2YgdGhlIE9wZW4gU291cmNlIEluaXRpYXRpdmUuIE9mZmlj aWFsIHN0YXRlbWVudHMgYnkgdGhlIE9wZW4gU291cmNlIEluaXRpYXRpdmUgd2lsbCBiZSBzZW50 IGZyb20gYW4gb3BlbnNvdXJjZS5vcmcgZW1haWwgYWRkcmVzcy4KCkxpY2Vuc2UtZGlzY3VzcyBt YWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKTGljZW5zZS1kaXNjdXNzQGxpc3RzLm9wZW5zb3VyY2Uub3JnCmh0dHA6Ly9s aXN0cy5vcGVuc291cmNlLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpY2Vuc2UtZGlzY3Vzc19saXN0 cy5vcGVuc291cmNlLm9yZwo= --===============2049218738059204070==--