Hacker News Reader

Comment by rileymat2 | Hacker News Reader

> With Open Source/Free Software as well as Creative Commons we have build pipelines to contribute to the commons (great!) but we never thought about how to defend those commons against appropriation.

Perhaps the CC people have not thought about this, but it is precisely why GPL exists, and later AGPL.

If courts find that derivative work comes from AI systems, the AGPL will become a very interesting legal landscape for even hosted models.

View on HN

> Perhaps the CC people have not thought about this, but it is precisely why GPL exists, and later AGPL.

Considering the next sentence is "This is why Open Source ends up massively benefitting corporations who don't give much back.", I think this is more along the lines of the usual complaints about for example cloud providers not hiring the upstream devs for oss projects they sell "as-a-service" versions of.

CC SA(ShareAlike) clause is basically the equivalent of GPL: any derivations must be licensed the same as the original (either CC BY-SA or CC BY-NC-SA, latter only permitting noncommercial use).

Surely GPL'd code was swept up with ai training like the rest of the internet. Perhaps some of that code incidentally has licensing that works with this, but surely not all of it....

People should just modify the GPL and add a clause that explicitly forbids training AI and similar things. Instead of hoping a court will follow the logic, just settle it for good.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com