Re: Help building Pen.el (GPT for emacs)

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 20:57:42 +0300
> From: Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
> Cc: rms@gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se, mullikine@gmail.com,
>   emacs-tangents@gnu.org
> 
> * Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> [2021-07-24 19:46]:
> 
> > > I have never stated it is incompatible with free software, I have
> > > asked how is GPL licensing compliance solved.
> > 
> > No, you said we shouldn't use this.
> 
> Sorry for misunderstandings. 

To avoid such misunderstandings, I suggest to tone down your language
when you are talking about licensing issues associated with some
technologies or products, so that what you write couldn't be
interpreted as saying that there are legal problems which prevent our
use of those technologies and products.

> Question was directed to author of Pen.el and there was no clear
> answer neither from you, so I found myself from online research that
> at least in US for now it is based on "fair use" doctrine.
> 
> When we take the word "fair" in its original definition, it should be
> obvious from online comments that many GPL authors do not really find
> it "fair". It is however one defense that all of present similar AI
> models have in common, they are to use "fair use" doctrine. We will
> see that.

That is a separate issue, which is IMO completely unrelated.  Emacs is
Free Software, and is distributed under GPL, so for Emacs it is OK to
allow users to use other GPL code out there in their programs.  That
there are producers of proprietary software who use pieces of GPL code
in their proprietary products without complying with GPL is completely
unrelated to what the Emacs project can do with this technology.