Hi Denis, sex 10 jul 2026 às 17:03:04 (1783713784), [email protected] enviou: > On Thu, 09 Jul 2026 20:51:59 +0200 > Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> wrote: > > > One case is that of copyright infringement where the LLM regurgitated > > code that is proprietary or published under an incompatible license. > > From what I’ve seen (references are in the GCD and in its previous > > versions), this scenario is not science-fiction. > > > > More generally, the legal status of copyright output is still being > > debated in every jurisdiction, and the fact that many would like to > > treat it as public domain does not change that. > > Thanks a lot for caring about that !!!! > > The problem I see here is on practical grounds: how can we define a > safe area where we could accept contributions made with LLMs when we > are not law specialists. >
Through a GCD such as this one. > If we manage to do it, it would be good enough for me. I may or may not > agree with the rest but at least it would not create domino effects on > projects/people/organizations that depend on Guix. > > With my GNU Boot co-maintainer hat, I've asked Zoë Kooyman for advice on > the topic, more precisely on the part about the Threshold of > originality. I've also asked gnu-prog-discuss as well. > > I also shared some of my concerns about not taking the time to > wait for GNU, not waiting to get inputs from lawyers, floating legal > theories without knowing much about it (that's my case at least), etc. > You've been repeating that for a while now, always othering GNU and explicitly asking for a command from elsewhere to overrule our collective capacity to form consensus on this matter. This attitude is disheartening and an attack to the consensus decision making that we've adopted for ourselves. This kind of attitude cannot be tolerated as it attacks the legitimacy of the GCD process itself, it attacks our community's autonomy, it attacks our citizenship and our capacity for ethical behavior. So let's put this attitude to rest. We are gnus and as gnus we are collectively deciding upon rules for ourselves which is a condition for ethical behavior. No one can behave ethically by following heteronomous rules as being capable of ethics presupposes being free to act otherwise, not being coerced into compliance, nor mechanically applying rules. Having a consensus decision making process serves as a model for gnus who are not here and also an invitation to the larger community to take an active role on debates and policies that affects us all. By taking the initiative, we are also properly exerting our capacity to influence others and to change the status quo, instead of being passive machines in wait for orders. Following on this path, Guix could become the gnu assembly and the reference implementation of GNU OS (remember, GNU was supposed to be an OS) if we are able to persuade gnus who are scattered of the advantages (both technical and political) of congregating here. And no, lawyers can't give you a definitive answer for something that the law and the courts have not decided yet. They are also advisors, neither dictators nor judges, so their counsel is just that: a counsel. For a social movement to be triving it has to be able to set its own rules and goals, instead of asking for them to come from elsewhere. It's impossible to effect social change by merely following orders. Hopefully that clears things out.
