I'm preparing to open source some code I have and I explicitly do not want it used to train AI in any fashion. Is there an open source license that prohibits this?
Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
1–10 of 107 posts
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#2Zero chance this gets respected but worth doing nonetheless.
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#3Any license that discriminates based on use case would not qualify as open source under the Open Source Initiative definition, nor as free software under the FSF definition. You also shouldn't expect for your project/code to be reused by or incorporated into any free or open-source projects, since your license would be incompatible.
You can release software under whatever license you want, though whether any restriction would be legally enforceable is another matter.
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#4If it’s open source but with an extra restriction then it’s not Open Source:
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#5If you release it as GPL or AGPL, it should be pretty difficult to obey those terms while using the code for AI training. Of course, they'll probably scoop it up anyway, regardless of license.
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#6I understand wanting to control how your code is used, that’s completely fair. Most open source licenses, though, are written to permit broad usage, and explicitly prohibiting AI training can be tricky legally.
That said, it’s interesting how often AI is singled out while other uses aren’t questioned. Treating AI or machines as “off-limits” in a way we wouldn’t with other software is sometimes called machine prejudice or carbon chauvinism. It can be useful to think about why we draw that line.
If your goal is really to restrict usage for AI specifically, you might need a custom license or explicit terms, but be aware that it may not be enforceable in all jurisdictions.
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#7If it’s open source but with an extra restriction then it’s not Open Source: https://opensource.org/osd
You realize that the world changes and we update out language as we go?
Saying "we already have a definition" when it's not clear whether it's been considered whether that definition would interact with something which is new, is... I don't even know what word to use. Square? Stupid?
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#8Do you think this is going to stop anyone, considering everyone is already training on All Rights Reserved content which is inherently more restrictive than whatever license you're going to use?
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#9If you don't want AIs to train on it you should not open source it.
Re: Ask HN: Anti-AI Open Source License?
#10Any license that discriminates based on use case would not qualify as open source under the Open Source Initiative definition, nor as free software under the FSF definition. You also shouldn't expect for your project/code to be reused by or incorporated into any free or open-source projects, since your license would be incompatible. You can release software under whatever license you want, though whether any restrict…
> Any license that discriminates based on use case would not qualify as open source under the Open Source Initiative definition, nor as free software under the FSF definition.
Freedom 0 is about the freedom to run the software "for any purpose", not "use" the software for any purpose. Training an LLM on source code isn't running the software. (Not sure about the OSD and don't feel like reviewing it.)
Anyway, you could probably have a license that explicitly requires AIs trained on a work to be licensed under a compatible free software license or something like that. Conditions like that are comparable to the AGPL or something, adding requirements but still respecting freedom 0.
But that's not an "anti-AI" license so much as one that tries to avert AI-based copyright laundering.