On Fri, Jul 18, 2025, 5:36 AM Florian Weimer <fwei...@redhat.com> wrote:
> * Simo Sorce: > > > In my opinion the situation is simple, as already several courts > > hinted, the output of an AI cannot be copyrighted, and that makes sense > > given Copyright hinges on protecting human creativity and AIs clearly > > are not human. So Fedora could make a decision that the default license > > for AI generated code is just "Public Domain". > > This is a very U.S.-centric view. I think Fedora should take a more > global perspective. Fedora should not play to isolationist tendencies > by adopting policies that make Fedora legal to use in the United States > only. > Do you have a reference to a court in another region that has stated an opposite view? Or perhaps some proposed legislation from somewhere? While I tend to agree Fedora should take a global view, it's not clear to me there is any consistent view on AI copyright outside of what Simo described. If there is, and those views proliferate in ways that run counter to each other, you run the risk of contorting a policy in a manner that doesn't lend itself to actually being useful. Also worth remembering Fedora is backed by a US company and is held to US laws already. Export control, etc. josh
-- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
