On Sat, Aug 22, 2026 at 11:46:20AM -0000, andrew.lelechenko--- via ghc-devs
wrote:
> On the substance of matter, any meaningful legal advice from
> intellectual property lawyers on the subject is likely to cost five
> digits (unless the said lawyer will meat-proxy what ChatGPT says, of
> course). Given that hundreds of major companies all over the world use
> LLMs to write their cherished all-rights-reserved software (= their
> stakes to lose copyright are much more significant than for GHC team)
> and their lawyers are seemingly satisfied with it, there does not seem
> to be an immediate or visible danger. Ultimately at the moment all
> legal opinions on LLMs are a coin toss, until the matter is actually
> tested by courts. There is simply not enough legal evidence at the
> moment for lawyers to provide anything resembling a definitive answer.
FWIW, the OpenSSL project has an AI policy:
https://openssl-library.org/post/2026-06-18-ai-policy/
https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/ai-policy/
The Two Core Requirements
If a non-trivial portion of your submission has been created using
an AI tool, you must:
1. declare it in your commit message using an Assisted-by trailer, and
2. have signed a Contributor License Agreement (CLA) that includes the AI
clauses. Both requirements apply together. Neither alone is sufficient.
--
Viktor. 🇺🇦 Слава Україні!
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
