<div dir="ltr">Apologize, my mistake. I'm new to mailing lists and sent this to both addresses.<br>This proposal is currently up for discussion, and if the community agrees, the final text can be submitted for review and registration after discussion, as I understand it.<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 18:32, Pamela Chestek <<a href="mailto:pamela.chestek@opensource.org">pamela.chestek@opensource.org</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"><u></u>
<div>
McCoy, I also have an email where it was submitted to license-review
on 3/12/26 at 5:30 pm PT?<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
<div>On 3/13/2026 9:10 AM, McCoy Smith
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p>Nik:</p>
<p>Are you requesting approval of this license by OSI, or just
discussion of the license? You've submitted to the
license-discuss list, which is where licenses are discussed, but
does not result in the license being put through the approval
process. Your statement that you are "submitting" the license
"for consideration" is ambiguous.</p>
<p>If you are seeking approval, you need to use the correct
mailing list and provide all the data required for a submission,
which has not been done in your e-mail below.</p>
<div>On 3/12/2026 4:20 AM, Nik wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<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>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
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" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.
License-discuss mailing list
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
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" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.
License-discuss mailing list
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</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>