On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 05:48:41PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > QEMU's AI generated content policy does not flesh out the exception > process yet. Do it, while at the same time keeping things informal: ask > contributors to explain what they would like to use AI for, and let them > reach a consensus with the project on why it is credible to claim DCO > compliance in that specific scenario. > > In other words, exceptions do not "solve the AI copyright problem". They > take a position that a reasonable contributor could have, and assert that > we're comfortable with the argument. > > Suggested-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> > --- > docs/devel/code-provenance.rst | 16 ++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst > index dba99a26f64..103e0a97d76 100644 > --- a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst > +++ b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst > @@ -326,8 +326,13 @@ The QEMU project thus requires that contributors refrain > from using AI content > generation agents which are built on top of such tools. > > This policy may evolve as AI tools mature and the legal situation is > -clarifed. In the meanwhile, requests for exceptions to this policy will be > -evaluated by the QEMU project on a case by case basis. To be granted an > -exception, a contributor will need to demonstrate clarity of the license and > -copyright status for the tool's output in relation to its training model and > -code, to the satisfaction of the project maintainers. > +clarified. > + > +Exceptions > +^^^^^^^^^^ > + > +The QEMU project welcomes discussion on any exceptions to this policy, > +or more general revisions. This can be done by contacting the qemu-devel > +mailing list with details of a proposed tool, model, usage scenario, etc. > +that is beneficial to QEMU, while still mitigating the legal risks to the > +project. After discussion, any exception will be listed below.
"Legal risks to the project" is all-encompassing and vague. People may not know how to start addressing the topic and might therefore not attempt to request an exception. I suggest replacing "legal risks to the project" with something more concrete like "issues around license and copyright status required to satisfy the Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO) requirements". > -- > 2.51.0 >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
