Piero Bosio Social Web Site Personale

@xgranade
Yes.

But lets not clutch pearls over how a understaffed FOSS project decides to merge their work.

@xgranade
They have been the upstream maintainer for years, so I don't see any huge issue with that.

I would have done the same probably?

@scy @jzb @joshbressers

Depends.

If you have a permissively licensed project, you can change the source to GPL by just using a poison pill approach.

This is what Forgejo did as an example.

https://forgejo.org/2024-08-gpl/

This works as the MIT license terms are met.

The other way would not work.

@wronglang
That would probably not be litigated under copyright law.

@dekkia
Public domain is not really a thing in most of the world. So "yes", for US. For EU it's more complicated.

@joshbressers @scy

Sure, but we are not really looking at, nor discussing, cases where LLMs spits out something verbatim from another project in this case.

@muelli @scy
Sure.

But I'm not going to spend time on a strawman disguised as a logic puzzle. That isn't how laws work nor how they are formed.

@joshbressers @scy

Supreme Court has already dismissed such cases.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/02/us-supreme-court-declines-to-hear-dispute-over-copyrights-for-ai-generated-material.html

So we are getting a precedent in US law. Yet to be settled in any high court in the EU though.

@mgorny
Amazing.

@scy
I'm not a lawyer so I'm not going to try and debate what is and isn't a copyright violation.

@scy
A license violation usually implies that there is a copyright violation to begin with.

@scy
US court is leaning towards that LLM generated code is fundamentally not copyrightable.

This is a different problem to the moral issues I have with this.

Apparently chardet got Claude to rewrite the entire codebase from LGPL to MIT?

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/releases/tag/7.0.0

That is one way to launder GPL code I guess?