this copyright thread confuses me, because …. what Haskell code thats public could these model echo into a ghc edit that isnt gonna be basically ghc code? the architecture and naming conventions and code style is quite distinct and theres very few salient hs code bases that would actually be salient, and translating an algorithm or data structure from one programming language does not create copyright risk wrt the translated code except to the extent string literals or specific data is copyrighted…
i would love examples that ground the ip risk with now if we were talking abiut a bsd open source nosql db or web server, there’s would be lots to worry about agpl / gpl/ that commercial one that converts to apache after k years. in the case of ghc the very style and architecture just creates a risk of a model generating old no longer correct ancient ghc / haskell code! caveats: my family is basically all software ip lawyers and ive had to navigate quite complex ip nuances in my work over time. On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 2:34 AM andrew.lelechenko--- via ghc-devs < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Tom, > > > don't these two adjacent sentences contradict one another? > > I don't see how. Is there "an immediate or visible danger"? No. Is there a > way to eliminate any potential danger around LLM usage? No, "until the > matter is actually tested by courts". Is it worth to spend five digits on > some sort of "middle way", which might alleviate but not mitigate a > potential but unspecified danger? Also no. > > Best regards, > Andrew > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
