@bkuhn @cwebber @zacchiro @richardfontana We don't see any successful litigation yet stopping abusive "AI" companies from scooping up any free software, regardless of the strength of the license. It's a matter of power imbalance and who controls the legal system, not who's right or wrong. I don't thing stronger license terms will save us. Only organizing to bring them down can do that.
Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 19-Apr-2026 09:16:16 JST
Rich Felker
-
Embed this notice
Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 19-Apr-2026 09:24:03 JST
Rich Felker
@bkuhn @cwebber @zacchiro @richardfontana At the time we used the existing system against itself, it was largely a working system. Corporations actually feared "IP" law. They put ™ and ® and © all over the place meticulously. Companies had lost theirs by not doing in tin the past.
Nowadays, we hardly have a rule of law to begin with, and corporations just get to settle any infringement they're caught doing for 0.01% of the profit they made off the infringement. I don't see a way to use this system against itself. It's going to take more drastic things to tear it down.
-
Embed this notice
Bradley M. Kühn (bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org)'s status on Sunday, 19-Apr-2026 09:24:05 JST
Bradley M. Kühn
@dalias
Any complex public policy litigation takes ≥ 10 years to make its way through the Courts. *Thaler* was an anomaly precisely because Thaler narrowed the issue on purpose to a pointless degree (just to make a point, apparently).
The reason copyleft exists is because rather than wait for the Courts & legislature to make good law, we used the existing system against itself.I propose we design a series of moves that can do the same for LLM-backed genAI.
-
Embed this notice