Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> writes: > From: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > > There has been an explosion of interest in so called AI code > generators. Thus far though, this is has not been matched by a broadly > accepted legal interpretation of the licensing implications for code > generator outputs. While the vendors may claim there is no problem and > a free choice of license is possible, they have an inherent conflict > of interest in promoting this interpretation. More broadly there is, > as yet, no broad consensus on the licensing implications of code > generators trained on inputs under a wide variety of licenses > > The DCO requires contributors to assert they have the right to > contribute under the designated project license. Given the lack of > consensus on the licensing of AI code generator output, it is not > considered credible to assert compliance with the DCO clause (b) or (c) > where a patch includes such generated code. > > This patch thus defines a policy that the QEMU project will currently > not accept contributions where use of AI code generators is either > known, or suspected. > > These are early days of AI-assisted software development. The legal > questions will be resolved eventually. The tools will mature, and we > can expect some to become safely usable in free software projects. > The policy we set now must be for today, and be open to revision. It's > best to start strict and safe, then relax. > > Meanwhile requests for exceptions can also be considered on a case by > case basis. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > Acked-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> > Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> -- Alex Bennée Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro
