Greg Hogan <[email protected]> writes:

> On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 6:02 AM pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The ongoing GEMA suit is an example where the LLM used to print near-verbatim
>> song lyrics [1].
>
> Again extractive prompting on older models.
>

True; possibly stealing will not happen by chance.  Yes, we could take
that risk.


> And it should be noted that for future defense against copyright
> claims about new works, AI is creating an even larger public domain
> dataset. It is probable that in the near future nothing will be
> copyrightable as everything will be derivative of some AI generated
> creation.

No, derivative works of sizable copyrighted text are under copyright.

The future legal situation possibly will require that commercial LLM
users need to make payments to authors guilds, which would be
incompatible with free software.  However that is undecided and the
World Trade Organization maybe will take decades to decide.



>> - If a significant portion of your contribution (i.e. beyond simple
>>   autocomplete) was copied from somewhere else (i.e. AI, a website,
>>   another software project...) you are required to disclose it in the PR
>>   description.
>> - If you cannot guarantee the provenance and legal safety of your code,
>>   do not submit it.
>>
>> from [2].
>
> To the first part I would only add to make this "copyrightable contribution".
>
> The second part requiring a guarantee of legal safety prohibits any
> contribution to our project.

Human authors can guarantee this.



>> But my worry is that the agents (more than LLMs) obfuscate when they
>> steal.  That people will not know when their LLM contribution to Guix is
>> just a Scheme translation of other peoples’ copyrighted Rust code or
>> written by clickworkers.
>
> What is a clickworker? A work for hire?

Yes, AI companies hire people to read peoples’ input.

>
>> Even though LLMs clearly show some intelligence of their own when
>> figuring out the LEAN Github code for Erdős problems referenced in [3],
>> which then would clearly be usable public-domain code.
>>

Regards,
Florian

Reply via email to