On 27-May-26 05:41, Eric Rescorla wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 12:32 AM Brian E Carpenter <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Section 8 talks about tools, but the responsibility razor cleanly applies to the text about plagiarism. If content has been plagiarized, the authors are responsible. The authors might then attempt to hold a contributor responsible, but there is limit to how much responsibility can be deflected in these cases. Yes, which is exactly why it says "The authors or editors remain entirely responsible for any content generated by AI" and "The authors or editors must verify that no unacceptable plagiarism has been performed by AI." You're right, the same applies to any form of contribution, not just AI contributions. How, precisely, do you expect that authors are to do that?
Well, as an active author for an IEEE publication, I have recently submitted an article so I can tell you my procedure - I asked my coauthors if they'd used AI.
Suppose that Alice is an editor of an RFC and Bob provides a PR with some new text, which turns out to have been plagiarized from some non-RFC publication by Charlie. What is it you believe Alice ought to have done in order to detect this?
Well, there are tools for detecting plagiarism (very necessary for anyone evaluating student assignments these days) and AI-written text. But it comes back to Martin's insistence on author/editor responsibility - that's Alice's problem, and shouldn't become the RPC's problem. This is also another reason we'll need review by counsel. Brian -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
