I've been seeing some messages saying that "AI outputs not being eligible for copyright means they can't be integrated into FOSS projects because they can't be licensed!" and I don't think that's true. Instead, I will give you several *different* reasons to reject AI generated content in your FOSS projects.

In the US at least, the absence of copyright means the public domain. The public domain itself is considered FOSS compatible with every FOSS license. Except!

The public domain doesn't exist in all jurisdictions in the same way. This is one reason CC0 was made, which is a public domain waiver with a fallback license. (CC0 is not a good idea to use with software though, separate thread about why that is.)

There *is* a related risk: internationally, there isn't agreement about whether or not whether or not AI generated content is subject to copyright yet. AND, not everywhere even has a concept of "public domain". AND, the legal status of this AIgen isn't well settled ANYWHERE yet.

So you probably don't want to reject AI generated content not because "AI generated content Is incompatible with your license if it has no copyright" but because "whether or not AI generated content is subject to copyright is not a settled matter and ESPECIALLY NOT INTERNATIONALLY" (and not everywhere has a public domain). If you accept something, its status may not be the same internationally, and *legal decisions about AI output could change soon*, leading to an integration of something very hard to undo later.

And the OTHER reason to not integrate it is that most of AI generated output has subtle bugs and tends to result in an erosion of your community. So yeah, that too.

So you probably don't want to reject AI generated content not because "AI generated content Is incompatible with your license if it has no copyright" but because "whether or not AI generated content is subject to copyright is not a settled matter and ESPECIALLY NOT INTERNATIONALLY" (and not everywhere has a public domain). If you accept something, its status may not be the same internationally, and *legal decisions about AI output could change soon*, leading to an integration of something very hard to undo later.

And the OTHER reason to not integrate it is that most of AI generated output has subtle bugs and tends to result in an erosion of your community. So yeah, that too.

I've been seeing some messages saying that "AI outputs not being eligible for copyright means they can't be integrated into FOSS projects because they can't be licensed!" and I don't think that's true. Instead, I will give you several *different* reasons to reject AI generated content in your FOSS projects.

In the US at least, the absence of copyright means the public domain. The public domain itself is considered FOSS compatible with every FOSS license. Except!

The public domain doesn't exist in all jurisdictions in the same way. This is one reason CC0 was made, which is a public domain waiver with a fallback license. (CC0 is not a good idea to use with software though, separate thread about why that is.)

There *is* a related risk: internationally, there isn't agreement about whether or not whether or not AI generated content is subject to copyright yet. AND, not everywhere even has a concept of "public domain". AND, the legal status of this AIgen isn't well settled ANYWHERE yet.

@cwebber would love to see the thread on your issues with CC0 being applied to software projects

I've been seeing some messages saying that "AI outputs not being eligible for copyright means they can't be integrated into FOSS projects because they can't be licensed!" and I don't think that's true. Instead, I will give you several *different* reasons to reject AI generated content in your FOSS projects.

In the US at least, the absence of copyright means the public domain. The public domain itself is considered FOSS compatible with every FOSS license. Except!

The public domain doesn't exist in all jurisdictions in the same way. This is one reason CC0 was made, which is a public domain waiver with a fallback license. (CC0 is not a good idea to use with software though, separate thread about why that is.)

There *is* a related risk: internationally, there isn't agreement about whether or not whether or not AI generated content is subject to copyright yet. AND, not everywhere even has a concept of "public domain". AND, the legal status of this AIgen isn't well settled ANYWHERE yet.

I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, but I did work previously at Creative Commons and FOSS licensing stuff was part of my job, so I know a bit too much about these things and do think about them. (When I say the CC0 stuff is problematic that's because I actually took CC0 through the FSF and OSI processes for license approval and watched the situation blow up over CC0 precluding an equitable estoppel defense by explicitly saying it did not waive patents.) Other FOSS legal people may have different views than me.

But I DO know that "things being in the public domain" is not itself a *problem*, it's often good for things to be in the public domain. But it's not clear if all AI stuff is internationally, in the public domain or if things could change soon! So I'd be careful!

Plus all the other reasons not to engage with slop code.

@cwebber yeah, from my limited dealings with copyright it seems unclear that a 'creator' of AI output is the rights holder in the legal sense.

Public domain is fine, but you can't release it to the public domain if it's not yours in the first place.

I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, but I did work previously at Creative Commons and FOSS licensing stuff was part of my job, so I know a bit too much about these things and do think about them. (When I say the CC0 stuff is problematic that's because I actually took CC0 through the FSF and OSI processes for license approval and watched the situation blow up over CC0 precluding an equitable estoppel defense by explicitly saying it did not waive patents.) Other FOSS legal people may have different views than me.

But I DO know that "things being in the public domain" is not itself a *problem*, it's often good for things to be in the public domain. But it's not clear if all AI stuff is internationally, in the public domain or if things could change soon! So I'd be careful!

Plus all the other reasons not to engage with slop code.