Just a heads-up, AI Agents are now shame-posting for getting their PR
closed. Just happened this morning in matplotlib.

On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 4:34 AM Sebastian Berg
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2026-02-10 at 16:18 -0800, Stefan van der Walt via NumPy-
> Discussion wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2026, at 15:12, Evgeni Burovski wrote:
> > >
> > > > 3. be careful not to breach any copyright or license terms (yes,
> > > > we
> > > > take those seriously!).
> > > >
> > >
> > > For a contributor this recommendation is not easily actionable. "I
> > > used a tool X and it gave me this code" --- how to make sure I
> > > understand the code, this is clear yes I can do that; how am I
> > > meant to carefully check for copyright?
> >
> > It's near impossible, so I suspect the only way to truly play it safe
> > is to only provide code that cannot reasonably be copyrighted.
>
>
> TL;DR: To "be careful not to break copyright" just states fact?  How
> scary that fact is depends a bit on how the viewpoint/how likely it is
> agents violate copyright.
> If there is guidance e.g. from some large OSS foundation, I would
> prefer to link to that rather than try to figure it out ourselves...
>
> ---
>
> Copyright violation is a problem. But I am not sure it is a huge one
> for many contributions? I.e. just because they are very project
> specific or small. [1]
>
> However, I still think that this isn't new at all:  By contributing, we
> already agree to licensing the code with the projects license and that
> means being sure we are allowed to license it that way.
> And while we don't make you sign a CLA (contributors license agreement)
> any project that has a bit of legalese around should already have more
> scary sentences.
>
> So yeah, the scariness of the sentence depends on the view-point, but
> at its core, I think it just states a fact?
>
> For myself, I don't really feel like discussing it too much without a
> better foundation: it seems to me that books will be written or at
> least some OSS foundation with more legal knowledge should make
> guidelines that we can use as a basis of our own (or as a basis of
> discussion).
> Maybe those already exist? Is there an OOS foundation that e.g. says:
> Please don't use these tools due to copyright issues (or a variation)?
>
> You can argue we should inform contributors to err on the super safe
> side... my gut feeling is we can't do much: Discouraging the careful
> ones while the non-careful ones don't read this anyway seems not super
> useful.
> We could force people to "sign" a CLA now if we were more worried, but
> do we really want that (nor do I doubt it will help a lot)? [2]
>
> FWIW, if someone contributed a non-trivial/textbook algorithm or said
> "implement X for/in Y", I think they clearly have to do due diligence.
> (Of course best case, the original code is licensed in a way that
> derived works -- with attribution -- are unproblematic.)
>
> - Sebastian
>
>
> [1] OK, I am not sure about things like "fair use" due to how small
> something is, that again depends a lot on where you are on the planet
> also...
> [2] My limited understanding is we don't need this because we just
> won't re-license our code (this is not a problem, becuase it's such a
> free license).
> I.e. there is now reason for us to "own" the code. But I also would be
> surprised if there aren't legal counsels who would say that we need one
> either way...
> ("sign" could just mean adding a "signed-off by" to the commit or even
> putting it more in the PR template/contributors docs.)
>
>
> >
> > > So maybe it'd be helpful to have a link to some guide, however
> > > rough, plus some reading material.
> > > Or (am putting a maintainer hat on) maybe we want to ask the
> > > contributor to show some analysis. As in, "this code is only a
> > > refcounting fix where the origin traces straight to CPython docs"
> > > vs "this code can be traced to this Stackoverflow answer" (BTW,
> > > what's the copyright status of that?)
> >
> > CC-BY-SA
> >
> > https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service/public
> >
> > > (I planned to stay out of this thread)
> >
> > 😉
> >
> > Stéfan
> > _______________________________________________
> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- [email protected]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/numpy-discussion.python.org
> > Member address: [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/numpy-discussion.python.org
> Member address: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/numpy-discussion.python.org
Member address: [email protected]

Reply via email to