From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E46A4FF69 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 07:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52FFB68F694; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 10:10:09 +0300 (EEST) Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef2.ens.fr [129.199.96.40]) by ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3FA868F627 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 10:10:02 +0300 (EEST) X-ENS-nef-client: 129.199.129.80 ( name = phare.normalesup.org ) Received: from phare.normalesup.org (phare.normalesup.org [129.199.129.80]) by nef.ens.fr (8.14.4/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id 5647A2wk031715 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 09:10:02 +0200 Received: by phare.normalesup.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 2B4E02EFE3; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 09:10:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 09:10:02 +0200 From: Nicolas George To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Message-ID: References: <6212824.lOV4Wx5bFT@falbala> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]); Fri, 04 Jul 2025 09:10:02 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Introducing policies regarding "AI" contributions X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: Alexander Strasser via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-07-04): > For "AI" (in the LLM sense) I think it's usually not at all easy to > say if one has the right to license the code given it's trained on > a huge corpus of copyrighted and particularly licensed code. It is only an issue if the code is taken and submitted as is. But we can handle this issue because the code will be shit. We just need to be able to be firm against people who submit shitty code. On the other hand, if they use a LLM to prototype the use of an API they rarely use and whose documentation sucks (Android I am looking at you) and once it work they rewrite the code properly, then there is no copyright liability. Regards, -- Nicolas George _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".