Re: We should require AI disclosure

On 11/05/2026 13.48, Dave Cridland wrote:
> [..]
> Actually, an author can guarantee that they are in a position to 
> assign the copyright to the document to the XSF. By, literally, saying so.
>
> This indemnifies the XSF entirely (as long as we ensure it's explicit, 
> which I believe we do) - as far as the XSF is concerned, we had the 
> copyright assigned to us by someone who warranted that they were able 
> to do so. Therefore, we believe we own the copyright in good faith.
>
> [..]  I would first and foremost suggest that AI generated text is 
> just one aspect of copyrightability and copyright ownership, and 
> concentrate on whether or not the submitter asserts they have the 
> right to assign, and have done so.
>
I agree with this point of view. It does not matter how the work was 
authored or by what or whom. Making a special case for AI does not make 
sense to me here, and may actually make it harder on the XSF.

>  [..] I would much rather require that assignment (and the 
> corresponding assertion of ability) is made much broader, and covered 
> for example this message, and messages, comments, and so on in other 
> XSF venues.
We discussed whether we should have a general Note Well, modeled after 
the IETF's, before. Is that your suggestion here?

-- 
ralphm

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]