On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:40:26AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > There has been an explosion of interest in so called "AI" (LLM) > code generators in the past year or so. Thus far though, this is > has not been matched by a broadly accepted legal interpretation > of the licensing implications for code generator outputs. While > the vendors may claim there is no problem and a free choice of > license is possible, they have an inherent conflict of interest > in promoting this interpretation. More broadly there is, as yet, > no broad consensus on the licensing implications of code generators > trained on inputs under a wide variety of licenses. > > The DCO requires contributors to assert they have the right to > contribute under the designated project license. Given the lack > of consensus on the licensing of "AI" (LLM) code generator output, > it is not considered credible to assert compliance with the DCO > clause (b) or (c) where a patch includes such generated code. > > This patch thus defines a policy that the QEMU project will not > accept contributions where use of "AI" (LLM) code generators is > either known, or suspected. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > --- > docs/devel/code-provenance.rst | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
As open source LLMs mature, it may be possible to curate the training data so that the output complies with software licenses and can be used in QEMU. For the time being, the position in this patch seems reasonable because it prevents license problems down the road. Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
