On 2026-10-21, Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > In revision 1.340 of tmux on the OpenBSD repository the following > commit statement was made: > > "From Chris Lloyd with the assistance of Claude Code, GitHub > issue 4744." > > https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/log/src/usr.bin/tmux/format.c > > In the issue report on GitHub Nicholas Marriott comments: > > Because you wrote this with AI, it isn't clear that you have the > copyright, so we need a link to a statement from the Claude website > showing that they release any copyright over this code to you (and > therefore you own it and are able to license it with the ISC license > used by tmux). > > And Chris Lloyd then responds: > > Anthropic waives all rights of the outputs of Claude.
That's like 15 lines and not something that would normally result in a copyright addition, as long as nobody is claiming rights on it > But in the email about ext4fs in the reply from Theo, it is clearly > stated: > > It is blatantly obvious to everyone that these AI were provided with > large volumes of code, and that licenses on the files are ignored, > because from the companies's perspective this is "teaching". > > The output of these AI is a sophisticated form of pattern > regurgitation. Regurtigating the old. Generally the regurgitation > is differnet. But that's not the real problem. > > Noone can put a Copyright onto that output, because under the > current laws that requires a human to have created the output. > > Lacking Copyright (or similarily a Public Domain declaration by a > human), we don't receive sufficient rights grants which would permit > us to include it into the aggregate body of source code, without > that aggregate body becoming less free than it is now. > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=177425035627562&w=2 > > Having Anthropic just waive all rights is one thing, but they > obviously cannot waive any rights which they do not posses. As Theo > wrote, "licenses on the files are ignored", how then can this be > accepted by the OpenBSD project? That's 8000-odd lines and would want a copyright addition > My guess is that because tmux is not an internally developed > application like OpenSSH, it is "ported" into the base system just like > unbound, which is also not developed by OpenBSD, as such, the tmux > project is responsible for whatever goes into the code. As the code is > ISC license then this is compatible with the BSD license and OpenBSD > then really doesn't need to look further into that. As long as the > authors of tmux claim ownership of the code, which is then released > with the ISC license, it's their problem. If a legal problem should > arise then it's not directly relevant for OpenBSD. Should such a > problem require code removed from tmux by upstream, OpenBSD would then > just port the new version of tmux from upstream into the base system. > > Is this understood correctly? > > Kind regards, > Martin > > -- Please keep replies on the mailing list.
