<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi, exactly, AI-MIT is an independent new license that is inspired by MIT's structure and philosophy.<br><br></div>Sorry I forgot to attach text in the first message.<div><br></div><div>Nik</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">\u043f\u0442, 13 \u043c\u0430\u0440. 2026\u202f\u0433. \u0432 16:19, Simon Phipps <<a href="mailto:simon@webmink.net">simon@webmink.net</a>>:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Independently of any evaluation of the license itself (it was not attached to the request), I am concerned that the use of "MIT" in the proposed license name implies an association with Massachusetts Institute of Technology. As far as I can see the only association is the assertion that this license continues the spirit of the existing license under that name, which used the name validly.<div><br></div><div>Respectfully</div><div><br></div><div>Simon</div><div>(in a personal capacity)</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 1:56\u202fPM Nik <<a href="mailto:nik.sharky@gmail.com" target="_blank">nik.sharky@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Dear OSI License Review Committee,<br><br>I am submitting the **AI-MIT License, Version 1.0** for consideration by the Open Source Initiative.<br><br>## Summary<br><br>The AI-MIT License is a permissive open-source license designed to address a genuine gap: existing licenses were written for human authors and handle AI-generated code poorly, creating false implications about authorship and copyright status.<br><br>The license is deliberately minimal \u2014 it preserves the structure and permissiveness of the MIT License while adding three targeted changes for the AI context.<br><br>## The problem it solves<br><br>1. **False authorship implication.** When `Copyright (c) [year] [author]` is applied to fully AI-generated code, it implies human authorship and copyright that may not legally exist in most jurisdictions.<br><br>2. **No standard for disclosure.** There is no widely adopted mechanism for disclosing whether code is AI-generated, AI-assisted, or human-authored. This matters for supply-chain security, regulatory compliance (EU AI Act), and intellectual honesty in open source.<br><br>3. **Undefined copyright status.** Fully autonomous AI-generated code (no human creative input) is in a legal grey zone in most jurisdictions. A license that claims copyright over it is at best misleading, at worst invalid.<br><br>## What the license does differently from MIT<br><br>The license adds one structural element (the Authorship Declaration) and three conditions/clauses:<br><br>**Authorship Declaration** \u2014 a required checkbox at the top of the LICENSE file with three modes:<br>- *Fully AI-generated*: no copyright claimed; code dedicated to public domain<br>- *AI-assisted*: human-directed, AI-generated; standard copyright applies<br>- *Human-authored*: AI used as a tool only; identical to MIT posture<br><br>**Condition 2 \u2014 Transparency**: redistribution or use as AI training data must not misrepresent AI origin as human authorship.<br><br>**Condition 3 \u2014 No Copyright Claim**: for fully autonomous code, explicit public domain dedication (with a perpetual irrevocable fallback for jurisdictions where public domain dedication is impossible).<br><br>**Extended disclaimer**: adds three AI-specific disclaimers about training data provenance, regulatory compliance, and jurisdictional limitations of the authorship declaration.<br><br>## OSD compliance analysis<br><br>1. **Free Redistribution** \u2713 \u2014 no restriction on sale or distribution<br>2. **Source Code** \u2713 \u2014 no source restriction<br>3. **Derived Works** \u2713 \u2014 modification and redistribution permitted<br>4. **Integrity of the Author's Source Code** \u2713 \u2014 no patch-file requirement; attribution preserved<br>5. **No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups** \u2713<br>6. **No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor** \u2713<br>7. **Distribution of License** \u2713 \u2014 same rights apply to all recipients<br>8. **License Must Not Be Specific to a Product** \u2713<br>9. **License Must Not Restrict Other Software** \u2713<br>10. **License Must Be Technology-Neutral** \u2713<br><br>The Transparency condition (Condition 2) requires disclosure of AI origin but does not restrict use in any field \u2014 it is an attribution/honesty requirement, not a field-of-endeavor restriction.<br><br>## SPDX identifier<div><br>We are concurrently requesting the SPDX identifier `AI-MIT-1.0` through the SPDX GitHub repository.<br><br>## Repository</div><div><br>The full license text, README, translations, and supporting materials are available at: <br><a href="https://github.com/ai-mit-license/ai-mit-license" target="_blank">https://github.com/ai-mit-license/ai-mit-license</a><br><br>## A note on meta-context</div><div><br>This license was initially drafted with AI assistance (Claude, Anthropic) at the direction of a human. We believe this is appropriate and have disclosed it in the repository. The license is itself an example of the category of work it governs.<br><br>We welcome feedback from the committee and the community at large.<br><br>Respectfully, <font color="#888888"><font color="#888888"><br>Nik </font></font></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an <a href="http://opensource.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.<br>
<br>
License-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an <a href="http://opensource.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.<br>
<br>
License-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div>