Discussion
Loading...
@RussSharek I've done some work on this, but as pointed out elsewhere, these are very hard to enforce. https://billhunt.dev/blog/2025/11/12/no-ai-ethical-license/
@RussSharek I appreciate the thought. But my understanding is that under current U.S. case law, AI (or rather, LLM) scrapers rely on fair use, and so don’t need a license - which also means that you can’t use copyright to exclude them from using your work.
(You can still put whatever you like in the license, but they don’t have to care.)
Perhaps someone who actually knows anything about U.S. copyright law can comment.
@slothrop @RussSharek Keeping in mind that I am not a lawyer, just trying to do OSS shit the best I can, there is generally the technique of writing licenses that deny you usage if you do other things that the law nominally allows you to do? There was some discussion a few weeks ago about possibly funding the creation of a license that would give the user GPL-like permissions, but such that those permissions vanish if you include the software in a training set.
I don't think we have a legal leg to stand on in the face of ai's run by oligarch billionaires. What we do have is the ability to say we don't like it, and we're looking for small ways to do that because it matters to us.
One thing that makes this different is we aren't talking about software code. We make creative nonsense, which we share pretty freely online.