[testing22321]

> liability could very likely also fall on the Linux foundation.

It’s just the same as if I copy-paste proprietary code into the kernel and lie about it being GPL.

Is the Linux foundation liable there?

[sarchertech]

Maybe. DCOs haven’t been tested. But you can at least say that the person who did this committed fraud and that you had no reasonable way to know they would do that.

LLMs can and do regurgitate code without the user’s knowledge. That’s the problem, the user has no way to mitigate against it. You’re telling contributors “use this thing that has a random chance of creating infringing code”. You should have foreseen that would result in infringing code making its way into the kernel.

[testing22321]

If someone sent you some code and said “it’s all good bro, you can put it in the kernel with your name on it”, would you?

If you don’t feel comfortable about where some code has come from, don’t sign your name.

The fact LLMs exist and can generate code doesn’t change how you would behave and sign your name to guarantee something.

[sarchertech]

Are you being purposely obtuse?

[testing22321]

Not at all.

Linus and the rules have always been very clear. If you don’t know where code came from, don’t submit it.

[sarchertech]

That’s like a speed limit sign that says “whatever speed you think is reasonable” but in small print “as long as that doesn’t exceed 45mph”.

Yes it’s technically correct, but it won’t hold up I court and it’s a ridiculous statement.

What Linus’ statement is actually saying is that: we want to benefit from AI tooling, but we don’t want to accept any liability.