You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> on 2023/11/24 20:09:39 UTC
Re: openAI terms
I opened the PR some days ago.
https://github.com/apache/www-site/pull/328
PTAL Roman
On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:23 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 11:24 PM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks, Hen. That is exactly what I meant. I may be missing
> something, but it looks to me like the terms of Copilot itself do not
> preclude releasing under AL. If so, it would be good for us to include
> some kind of statement to that effect in a future update or addendum to
> [1]. When I first read that doc, I assumed that because Copilot uses
> ChatGPT under the covers, we were basically banning its use.
> >
> > I also had come to the same conclusion that since Github Copilot uses
> > GPT-* it might be banned. That's why I opened the other thread asking
> > if we should have a sort of 'Category X' list for generative tools but
> > I see that it is still too early, and probably too much of work that
> > it is not up to us to do it (why should the ASF be guessing on closed
> > source vendors TOUs?).
> >
> > The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that we should not
> > mention any vendor specifically or we will end up needing to maintain
> > this type of list, or answer to questions about which products are
> > good to use or not. In the current version of the document the mention
> > 'AWS CodeWhisperer recently added a feature that provides notice and
> > attribution' this mention may make people guess the opposite, that it
> > is an 'Apache compliant' solution and we should not do this as a
> > neutral org.
> >
> > We should probably clarify that, if you agree I will open a PR with an
> > extra section of the FAQ clarifying that it is not up to (ASF legal)
> > to interpret the TOU of non open-source generative tools, and that we
> > will not have a list of 'compliant' or 'banned' tools because the
> > TOUs, and remind contributors to don't second guess the TOUs. WDYT?
>
> In general the above sounds about right, but the devil is in the
> wording details, so please submit a PR and let's take a look.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 2:13 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 9:39 PM Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, Hen. That is exactly what I meant. I may be missing
> something, but it looks to me like the terms of Copilot itself do not
> preclude releasing under AL. If so, it would be good for us to include
> some kind of statement to that effect in a future update or addendum to
> [1]. When I first read that doc, I assumed that because Copilot uses
> ChatGPT under the covers, we were basically banning its use.
> > >
> > > Honestly, the best clarification here I could think of would be
> > > something along the lines of: please don't second guess vendor's TOUs.
> > > Your usage of their tools is expected to be bound by the totality of a
> > > given TOU and you're not expected to go outside of the TOU text to
> > > further clarify what vendor may have in mind.
> > >
> > > If somebody is ready to make that update (it should probably go into
> > > the FAQ section) I'd love to merge it.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
Re: openAI terms
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>.
I'll review shortly...
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 10:10 PM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I opened the PR some days ago.
> https://github.com/apache/www-site/pull/328
>
> PTAL Roman
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:23 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 11:24 PM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks, Hen. That is exactly what I meant. I may be missing something, but it looks to me like the terms of Copilot itself do not preclude releasing under AL. If so, it would be good for us to include some kind of statement to that effect in a future update or addendum to [1]. When I first read that doc, I assumed that because Copilot uses ChatGPT under the covers, we were basically banning its use.
>> >
>> > I also had come to the same conclusion that since Github Copilot uses
>> > GPT-* it might be banned. That's why I opened the other thread asking
>> > if we should have a sort of 'Category X' list for generative tools but
>> > I see that it is still too early, and probably too much of work that
>> > it is not up to us to do it (why should the ASF be guessing on closed
>> > source vendors TOUs?).
>> >
>> > The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that we should not
>> > mention any vendor specifically or we will end up needing to maintain
>> > this type of list, or answer to questions about which products are
>> > good to use or not. In the current version of the document the mention
>> > 'AWS CodeWhisperer recently added a feature that provides notice and
>> > attribution' this mention may make people guess the opposite, that it
>> > is an 'Apache compliant' solution and we should not do this as a
>> > neutral org.
>> >
>> > We should probably clarify that, if you agree I will open a PR with an
>> > extra section of the FAQ clarifying that it is not up to (ASF legal)
>> > to interpret the TOU of non open-source generative tools, and that we
>> > will not have a list of 'compliant' or 'banned' tools because the
>> > TOUs, and remind contributors to don't second guess the TOUs. WDYT?
>>
>> In general the above sounds about right, but the devil is in the
>> wording details, so please submit a PR and let's take a look.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 2:13 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 9:39 PM Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks, Hen. That is exactly what I meant. I may be missing something, but it looks to me like the terms of Copilot itself do not preclude releasing under AL. If so, it would be good for us to include some kind of statement to that effect in a future update or addendum to [1]. When I first read that doc, I assumed that because Copilot uses ChatGPT under the covers, we were basically banning its use.
>> > >
>> > > Honestly, the best clarification here I could think of would be
>> > > something along the lines of: please don't second guess vendor's TOUs.
>> > > Your usage of their tools is expected to be bound by the totality of a
>> > > given TOU and you're not expected to go outside of the TOU text to
>> > > further clarify what vendor may have in mind.
>> > >
>> > > If somebody is ready to make that update (it should probably go into
>> > > the FAQ section) I'd love to merge it.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Roman.
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>> > >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: openAI terms
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>.
Sorry! This one REALLY fell through the cracks -- it is merge now.
Thanks,
Roman.
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 12:10 PM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I opened the PR some days ago.
> https://github.com/apache/www-site/pull/328
>
> PTAL Roman
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:23 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 11:24 PM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks, Hen. That is exactly what I meant. I may be missing something, but it looks to me like the terms of Copilot itself do not preclude releasing under AL. If so, it would be good for us to include some kind of statement to that effect in a future update or addendum to [1]. When I first read that doc, I assumed that because Copilot uses ChatGPT under the covers, we were basically banning its use.
>> >
>> > I also had come to the same conclusion that since Github Copilot uses
>> > GPT-* it might be banned. That's why I opened the other thread asking
>> > if we should have a sort of 'Category X' list for generative tools but
>> > I see that it is still too early, and probably too much of work that
>> > it is not up to us to do it (why should the ASF be guessing on closed
>> > source vendors TOUs?).
>> >
>> > The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that we should not
>> > mention any vendor specifically or we will end up needing to maintain
>> > this type of list, or answer to questions about which products are
>> > good to use or not. In the current version of the document the mention
>> > 'AWS CodeWhisperer recently added a feature that provides notice and
>> > attribution' this mention may make people guess the opposite, that it
>> > is an 'Apache compliant' solution and we should not do this as a
>> > neutral org.
>> >
>> > We should probably clarify that, if you agree I will open a PR with an
>> > extra section of the FAQ clarifying that it is not up to (ASF legal)
>> > to interpret the TOU of non open-source generative tools, and that we
>> > will not have a list of 'compliant' or 'banned' tools because the
>> > TOUs, and remind contributors to don't second guess the TOUs. WDYT?
>>
>> In general the above sounds about right, but the devil is in the
>> wording details, so please submit a PR and let's take a look.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 2:13 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 9:39 PM Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks, Hen. That is exactly what I meant. I may be missing something, but it looks to me like the terms of Copilot itself do not preclude releasing under AL. If so, it would be good for us to include some kind of statement to that effect in a future update or addendum to [1]. When I first read that doc, I assumed that because Copilot uses ChatGPT under the covers, we were basically banning its use.
>> > >
>> > > Honestly, the best clarification here I could think of would be
>> > > something along the lines of: please don't second guess vendor's TOUs.
>> > > Your usage of their tools is expected to be bound by the totality of a
>> > > given TOU and you're not expected to go outside of the TOU text to
>> > > further clarify what vendor may have in mind.
>> > >
>> > > If somebody is ready to make that update (it should probably go into
>> > > the FAQ section) I'd love to merge it.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Roman.
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>> > >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org