AB 1043 is set to take effect in about 10 months (January 1, 2027). Reading the text literally, I realized it could be interpreted to require an age-bracket signal request even on the first launch of ordinary command-line tools like ls or grep.
shujisado.org/2026/03/02/c...
Do CC licenses reach AI outputs? I’ve summarized how Creative Commons terms may (or may not) apply across the AI workflow, from training data to output.
To be clear, CC obligations do not automatically propagate to every output, but misunderstandings here are common.
shujisado.org/2026/02/16/t...
【新作】クリエイティブ・コモンズはAIモデルやAI出力にどのように影響を及ぼすか？
CCの学習データがモデルや出力にどう条件が及ぶのか、CCのモデルが出力にどう条件が及ぶのかをまとめた解説。AI開発者だけでなく半分は利用者にもライセンスの影響範囲の示唆になると思う。
shujisado.com/2026/02/16/t...
CC側のAIガイドラインを再構成したものに近いが実務的にはなってると思う。非営利条件の発動するタイミングが他のCC条件とは異なること、保守的と法的に必要とみた場合の差が大きいことあたりを押さえればOKという感じ。他のライセンスもCCの延長線上で考えることができる。
If you prompt an AI to write code, who owns the output? It’s probably not you -- unless you add the "human spark."
I wrote about the boundary of copyrightability in AI-generated code, comparing the situation in Japan vs. the US.
shujisado.org/2025/12/10/t...
In this article, I analyze the current legal and technical landscape of this theory, exploring why it remains an indeterminate issue despite the widespread adoption of AI coding tools.
shujisado.org/2025/11/27/g...
While the initial uproar from the 2021 launch of GitHub Copilot has subsided, the theory that copyleft licenses like the GPL could extend to AI models trained on them is far from dead.
27.11.2025 13:18 — 👍 3 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
This is not just a tech policy. It is a "central strategic imperative" for Japan's "economic security" and the creation of a "democratic and open AI society".
opensource.jp/2025/11/10/p...
We call on the Japanese government to adopt this indivisible 3-part strategy:
- Promote OSI-Compliant Open Sourcing: Mandate that publicly funded AI models be released under the official Open Source AI Definition.
- Protect Developers:
- Open Up Training Data:
As the US, EU, and China all strategically promote Open Source AI to secure their own interests (market innovation, risk-based regulation, or state-led influence), Japan cannot afford to be a passive consumer. OSG-JP are urging the Japanese government to act now to avoid technological subordination.
10.11.2025 10:07 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0What's needed is not a one-size-fits-all template, but a "right-sized" approach. Projects should autonomously create CoC tailored to their specific scale, culture, and goals.
30.09.2025 11:32 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0My conclusion: A CoC should be a simple "shield" to protect the community's core function--building software. It must not become a complex "weapon" that can be turned against the community itself.
30.09.2025 11:32 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 2 📌 0
The post explores historical turning points:
- Debian -> Ubuntu developer migration (2004)
- Lessons from Donglegate at PyCon 2013
- The standardization by Contributor Covenant
- The mass resignation of Rust mod team
- Ruby CoC is built on Matz's principle of MINASWAN
ESR called the trend "infectious social insanity," and
DHH labeled the Contributor Covenant a "Trojan horse."
Are CoC really unnecessary? I share their concerns, so I examined the issue through the lens of history and practical application in my article.
Why Heavy Codes of Conduct are Unnecessary for most Open Source Projects:
shujisado.org/2025/09/30/w...
A thread on why the trend of complex Codes of Conduct (CoC) might be counterproductive for many Open Source communities. 🧵
I’ve published a piece that traces how US law moved Open Source licenses from permission to a regime where contract and copyright remedies coexist—and explains how today’s violation risks have evolved and intensified, plus what the community should do in response. shujisado.org/2025/09/17/f...
17.09.2025 12:52 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Ever wonder why US law treats Open Source licenses as "permission," but in the EU/Japan they're seen as contracts?
The answer is a fascinating Legal Hack in US Copyright Act that hackers used to build the entire Free movement. I wrote a deep dive on this secret history:
shujisado.org/2025/07/24/w...
QEMU has formally adopted a policy that rejects contributions containing code generated by AI tools. The main reason is that such AI-generated code might not satisfy the requirements of the DCO, on which contributors rely to demonstrate the validity of their patches.
shujisado.org/2025/07/02/h...
Last week, I discovered by chance that some Debian members are now aiming to bring DebConf to Japan. To raise public awareness, I published a brief article outlining the reasons previous bids were abandoned.
shujisado.org/2025/06/23/w...
There is no doubt that AI will replace much of what humans do. But so long as we remain foolish, we will still insist on doing things ourselves.
shujisado.org/2025/06/20/s...
I drafted these comments only a few days after the report’s release but left them in my drafts folder when the unseemly political drama unfolded. I have now touched them up slightly and made them public as part of cleaning out that folder.
shujisado.org/2025/06/19/u...
When explaining the concept of open source, I often say, “We have to accept that Open Source software can also be used in warfare.” However, I never thought I would actually learn that it was used to discuss the operational plans of the world's most powerful military.
25.03.2025 00:39 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
It's really interesting.
I'm glad to know that high-ranking officials in the Trump administration were fans of Open Source apps.
www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc...
In short, Japan needs strong leadership in the realm of open source. Of course, this isn’t limited to Open Source—it’s probably a fundamental issue for Japan as a whole.
www.linkedin.com/pulse/missin...
Although more Japanese companies are gradually setting up OSPO, over the past few years I’ve felt that simply having an OSPO is not enough for JP companies to truly embrace Open Source. I intended to explain my thoughts here, but the explanation grew lengthy, so I wrote a blog post about it instead.
20.03.2025 10:34 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0This article explores balancing our “freedom-first” philosophy with privacy/copyright law, Open Source community norms, and real AI/ML constraints. It also shows why some compromises on data requirements may be necessary right now.
18.02.2025 15:11 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
I joined the OSI’s early discussions on the Open Source AI Definition. From that experience, I wrote an article (personally) about requiring full training data in Open Source AI. If you’re curious about AI/ML openness, you might find it interesting.
shujisado.org/2025/02/18/s...
本稿は、自由の哲学を維持しながら、プライバシー法や著作権法、我々のコミュニティの慣習、あるいはAI/ML技術の現実との実用的なバランスを取る思考過程を解説するものである。言ってしまえば、まあデータ要件における妥協は現時点で何故必要であるかを説明するものとも言える。
18.02.2025 00:04 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0基本的には完全なデータの公開を求める勢力と求めない勢力の対立であるわけだが、前者はDebian的な完全な自由を求める勢力が支持し、後者は巨大ベンダーやAIコミュニティの一部の支持が強い。現在のオープンソースAIの定義はその中庸的でありながら若干データ完全性を求めない所に線を引いている。
18.02.2025 00:04 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
【完全保存版】DeepSeekのおかげでAIのオープンソース性について関心が高まっているが、AIがオープンソースであるための要件を考えると非常に面倒な問題もある。最たるものが学習データの完全な公開を必要とするかである。そこで、その点の世界で最も詳しい解説を書いた。
shujisado.com/2025/02/18/n...
MetaがLlamaの学習へ海賊版データを利用したとされる件。倫理的にはアレとしてフェアユース抗弁が通るだろうなというのと、仮に違法としても既存モデルの契約としての有効性は残るのだろう。ただ、Llama契約の強力な伝播性から海賊版データが伝播という悪いイメージが付くわな
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...
