Hi, In revision 1.340 of tmux on the OpenBSD repository the following commit statement was made:
"From Chris Lloyd with the assistance of Claude Code, GitHub issue 4744." https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/log/src/usr.bin/tmux/format.c In the issue report on GitHub Nicholas Marriott comments: Because you wrote this with AI, it isn't clear that you have the copyright, so we need a link to a statement from the Claude website showing that they release any copyright over this code to you (and therefore you own it and are able to license it with the ISC license used by tmux). And Chris Lloyd then responds: Anthropic waives all rights of the outputs of Claude. But in the email about ext4fs in the reply from Theo, it is clearly stated: It is blatantly obvious to everyone that these AI were provided with large volumes of code, and that licenses on the files are ignored, because from the companies's perspective this is "teaching". The output of these AI is a sophisticated form of pattern regurgitation. Regurtigating the old. Generally the regurgitation is differnet. But that's not the real problem. Noone can put a Copyright onto that output, because under the current laws that requires a human to have created the output. Lacking Copyright (or similarily a Public Domain declaration by a human), we don't receive sufficient rights grants which would permit us to include it into the aggregate body of source code, without that aggregate body becoming less free than it is now. https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=177425035627562&w=2 Having Anthropic just waive all rights is one thing, but they obviously cannot waive any rights which they do not posses. As Theo wrote, "licenses on the files are ignored", how then can this be accepted by the OpenBSD project? My guess is that because tmux is not an internally developed application like OpenSSH, it is "ported" into the base system just like unbound, which is also not developed by OpenBSD, as such, the tmux project is responsible for whatever goes into the code. As the code is ISC license then this is compatible with the BSD license and OpenBSD then really doesn't need to look further into that. As long as the authors of tmux claim ownership of the code, which is then released with the ISC license, it's their problem. If a legal problem should arise then it's not directly relevant for OpenBSD. Should such a problem require code removed from tmux by upstream, OpenBSD would then just port the new version of tmux from upstream into the base system. Is this understood correctly? Kind regards, Martin
