← Back to context

Comment by ThrowawayR2

3 hours ago

That was the point of FOSS and copyleft: the abolition of copyright on code allowing anyone to take code from any place to use however they please.

The entire concept of copyleft and free software depended on copyright: it isn't "take my code and do what you will", it is "here is a very explicit contract that demands you credit my work and even requires you to contribute back in return for my efforts". And like, maybe a world with no copyright at all is better! But that isn't the world we are in: it is no more legal for you to have an AI read my code and then port it into your codebase (which could involve training as an intermediate step or could merely involve the AI searching for it and loading it into its context) than would be for you to directly read my code and port it into your codebase or even for you to utilize a deterministic tool to read my code and port it into your codebase; you only get to do those things if you retain my license on the result and abide by its terms.

FWIW, many of us who do open source would also find that hypothetical world in which the idea of copyright is abolished rather enticing... but you pretending that is this current world whenever you want to steal our code whilst copyright still paints our interests in using and altering the code from companies that have always been in fear of our community and our licenses (Apple, Microsoft, etc.) as theft is not merely a bit shitty... it is kind of evil/cruel.

Yeah, I never contributed to FOSS to get credit; I contributed because I wanted something improved which I thought was not very good and thought that sharing the improvements with the world would be good (sharing is caring, after all). From a Free Software perspective, I actually quite like that Generative AI allows people to create the software they want and adapt it to their wants and needs. Free Software is about freedom, after all (free as in free speech). Unfortunate GAI tends to be quite resource intensive, which is bad; but local models are getting better all the time, so hopefully eventually anyone can run a GAI model on their own computer and have it create any and all software they want.

It's a bit like Bob Ross' Joy of Painting: if everyone can paint then anyone can make any painting they want to see.

Copyleft comes with restrictions on code - you have to keep it public. It's the BSD licenses that basically don't.

  • The end goal is not adoption of FOSS licenses, the end goal was the Four Freedoms ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition#T... )

    - The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).

    - The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

    - The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2).

    - The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

    Note that it "preserve licenses" and "preserve attribution" are very much not in that list. Well, the Four Freedoms are what these AI doohickeys enable by being able to in theory reverse engineer or replicate any code, making all code effectively "public", and to bypass any copyright issues around distribution. The fact that blowing away the existence of proprietary code also blows away the licenses of FOSS licensed code is a harmless side effect of getting to the actual goal.

    If any of this is surprising, then you didn't understand what you signed up for. The AI monkey's paw has curled and you've got what you asked for, sort of.