Re: GCC LLM policy adopted
Aigars Mahinovs <[email protected]> Mon, 3 Aug 2026 10:41:47 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.devel.vote |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABpYwDVdn22nvD5xeSzro3uSMSwKxY7Gd15noL+0YhYs-1JJ6w@mail.gmail.com> |
--000000000000ef996e0658208204 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 at 10:11, Gard Spreemann <[email protected]> wrote: > Is this really what we're discussing though? I can see why one would > want an AI policy not to bar on copyright grounds something that is not > copyrightable in the first place. That's reasonable. But I don't think > it's what people really mean when they're concerned about > copyright. The wording of the proposals bans *all* contributions where AI is used in their creation, without any regard to the copyrightability of the contribution itself. So that is why the argument is proposed, that if teh copyright *is* the key concern, then the policy should not apply to contrubitions small enough not to be considered as copyrightable and do so explicitly. -- Best regards, Aigars Mahinovs --000000000000ef996e0658208204 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir= =3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 at 10:11, Gard Spreemann &= lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br= ></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;= border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Is this really wha= t we're discussing though? I can see why one would<br> want an AI policy not to bar on copyright grounds something that is not<br> copyrightable in the first place. That's reasonable. But I don't th= ink<br> it's what people really mean when they're concerned about<br> copyright.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>The wording of the proposals ban= s *all* contributions where AI is used in their creation, without any regar= d to the copyrightability of the contribution itself.</div><div><br></div><= div>So that is why the argument is proposed, that if teh copyright *is* the= key concern, then the policy should not apply to contrubitions small enoug= h not to be considered as copyrightable and do so explicitly.=C2=A0</div></= div><br><span class=3D"gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir=3D"lt= r" class=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr">Best regards,<br>=C2=A0 =C2= =A0 Aigars Mahinovs</div></div></div> --000000000000ef996e0658208204--