On Sat, Aug 22, 2026 at 11:46:20AM -0000, andrew.lelechenko--- via ghc-devs wrote:
On the substance of matter, any meaningful legal advice from intellectual property lawyers on the subject is likely to cost five digits (unless the said lawyer will meat-proxy what ChatGPT says, of course). Given that hundreds of major companies all over the world use LLMs to write their cherished all-rights-reserved software (= their stakes to lose copyright are much more significant than for GHC team) and their lawyers are seemingly satisfied with it, there does not seem to be an immediate or visible danger. Ultimately at the moment all legal opinions on LLMs are a coin toss, until the matter is actually tested by courts. There is simply not enough legal evidence at the moment for lawyers to provide anything resembling a definitive answer.
FWIW, the OpenSSL project has an AI policy: https://openssl-library.org/post/2026-06-18-ai-policy/ https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/ai-policy/ The Two Core Requirements If a non-trivial portion of your submission has been created using an AI tool, you must: 1. declare it in your commit message using an Assisted-by trailer, and 2. have signed a Contributor License Agreement (CLA) that includes the AI clauses. Both requirements apply together. Neither alone is sufficient. -- Viktor. 🇺🇦 Слава Україні!