These patches contain three changes to QEMU's code provenance policy with respect to AI-generated content. I am sorting them from least to most controversial.
First, I am emphasizing the intended scope: the policy is not about content generators, it is about generated content (patch 1). Second, I am adding some procedural requirements and liability boundaries to the exception process (patches 2-3). These changes provide a structure for the process and clarify that the process is not an expansion of the maintainers' responsibilities. On top of these changes, however, I am also expanding the exception process so that it is actually feasible to request and obtain an exception. Requesting "clarity of the license and copyright status for the tool's output" is almost asking for the impossible; a problem that is also shared by other AI policies such as the Linux Foundation's (https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/generative-ai). Therefore, add a second case for an exception, limited but practical, which is "limited or non-existing creative content" (patch 4). Paolo Paolo Bonzini (4): docs/code-provenance: clarify scope very early docs/code-provenance: make the exception process more prominent docs/code-provenance: clarify the scope of AI exceptions docs/code-provenance: make the exception process feasible docs/devel/code-provenance.rst | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) -- 2.51.0
