> Either we believe in the principles of OSS or we do not. If you do not like the idea of your intellectual property being used for commercial purposes then this model is definitely not for you.

I've been writing open source for more than 20 years

I gave away my work for free with one condition: leave my name on it (MIT license)

the AI parasites then strip the attribution out

they are the ones violating the principles of open source

> then perhaps a different licensing and distribution model is what you are after.

I've now stopped producing open source entirely

and I suggest every developer does the same until the legal position is clarified (in our favour)

  > Either we believe in the principles of OSS or we do not.

What about respecting licenses?

Seriously, don't lick the boot. We can recognize that there's complexity here. Trivializing everything only helps the abusers.

Giving credit where credit is due is not too much to ask. Other people making money off my work can be good[0]. Taking credit for it is insulting

[0] If you're not making much, who cares. But if you're a trillion dollar business you can afford to give a little back. Here's the truth, OSS only works if we get enough money and time to do the work. That's either by having a good work life balance and good pay or enough donations coming in. We've been mostly supported by the former, but that deal seems to be going away

Open source software typically has a license. People not following the license isn’t tolerated.

This is what AI scrapers are doing. They’re taking your code, your artwork and your writing without any consideration for the license.

I think this may be too much of a "literal" interpretation of OSS without really considering the social contract many OSS supporters believe in, wherein users of OSS will act in good faith and might eventually reciprocate for the benefits they're getting, e.g. the way companies have slowly accepted paying their own employees to contribute to projects openly, releasing their own open source code, respecting the spirit of OSS licenses, sponsoring the developers of the thing they use, etc.

I think it's entirely fair that even staunch supporters of OSS get turned off when AI companies scrape their work to ingest into a black box regurgitator and then turn around and tell the world how their AI will make trillions of dollars by taking away the jobs of those obsolete OSS developers, showing no intention of ever giving back to the community.