[FFmpeg-devel] Re: question about submitting security patches

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>]

On Thu, 13 Nov 2025, 03:07 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, <
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:

> Hi Kieran
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 12:09:00AM -0800, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Nov 2025, 19:00 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, <
> > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Remi
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 06:03:38PM +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont via
> > > ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > > > Le lauantaina 8. marraskuuta 2025, 10.34.24 Itä-Euroopan normaaliaika
> > > Thomas
> > > > Dullien via ffmpeg-devel a écrit :
> > > > > What's the best way to submit these patches? There is the bug
> tracker,
> > > > > there is this mailing list - what's the best way to contribute
> them?
> > > >
> > > > I don't think that DNN-generated patches are compatible with the
> LGPL in
> > > the
> > > > first place, or it is at best very uncertain that they are. So then
> you
> > > cannot
> > > > contribute DNN-generated patches in any useful way at all.
> > >
> > > If you have concrete legal analysis or case law that supports this
> claim,
> > > please share it.
> > >
> >
> > If an LLM was trained on the leaked Microsoft Windows source code and it
> > used elements of that code when asked to write an FFmpeg patch, would
> that
> > patch be acceptable in your eyes?
>
> If a human was trained on the leaked Microsoft Windows source code and he
> used elements of that code when asked to write an FFmpeg patch, would that
> patch be acceptable in your eyes?
>
> We should forbid human written code?
>

An AI is not a human.

AIs have been shown to regurgitate copyrighted material when asked to solve
a problem.

Kieran

>
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org