[Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] Request for a moratorium on AI/LLM use within OSGeo

[Luí­s Moreira de Sousa]

Dear all,

let me offer an additional perspective on this matter, also in light of what is being discussed in parallel in this list [0].

1. Source code generated by a LLM is not protected by intellectual property laws and thus is not copyrightable. It follows, such code can't be licensed (at least in the OECD and possibly beyond). This aspect alone disqualifies any LLM-generated project (aka vibe-coded [1]) from the incubator. An OSI-approved licence is a requirement sine qua non for the incubator, and rightly so.

2. LLM-generated source code is being regarded by Judicial institutions as falling into "public domain". This has disparate implications in different jurisdictions. Whereas in the US or UK using such software may not pose great challenges, in continental Europe it exposes users to various liabilities. These will only be properly understood through jurisprudence.

3. OSGeo would be wise to stay away from vibe-coded projects posing for legitimate human creation (e.g. yielding copyright notice and licence). Such projects are pushing the boundaries of the Law, being easy targets for legal action, for instance in the scope of fair commercial competition. Direct commits by LLMs, impossible development times, ghost communities, the hallmarks of fake human creation are multiple and easy to spot. Welcoming such projects into the incubator might easily set OSGeo for legal complications, even in the cases in which the foundation does not assume copyright.

4. The inclusion of LLM-generated code in wider projects (e.g. a sub-module, a class, etc) may still allow for copyright and licencing, if *enough* human creation is involved. However, those modules still remain in "public domain" and there is at present no heuristic or guideline to determine whether a project includes enough human contribution to qualify for copyright. Whereas in abstract this management may well be left to PSCs, there is a catch: those projects whose copyright has been assigned to OSGeo itself. Therefore the Foundation should have a say in how LLM-generated contributions are managed in these cases.

5. There is also the CRA. Without tiring the reader too much, just to note the reasons disqualifying LLM-generated code for copyright, mostly likely disqualify it for distribution in the EU too. Jurisprudence to follow.

Regarding points 1, 2 and 3 (and 5), I believe no new policy needs to be set in place. It is all a matter of abiding by the Law, and making sure newcomers do so too. Point 4 might well require an update to current policy, or perhaps a different posture by the Foundation regarding copyright assignment.

This said, it is important to recognise this may all be a significant burden to an already burdened Board. Beyond this discussion folks like us opining in these lists should be able to reach concrete proposals or actions upon which the Board may promptly decide. Anyone interested in joining such effort?

Regards.

[0] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2026-October/040416.html

[1] https://www.acm.org/media-center/2026/april/techbrief-vibe-coding

--
Luís Moreira de Sousa
Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@luis_de_sousa
URL: https://ldesousa.codeberg.page

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.