The chardet Python library maintainers used Claude Code to rewrite the entire codebase and relicense it from LGPL to MIT in v7.0.0. This sparked controversy: the original author argues it violates the LGPL since the AI was prompted with the original licensed code, bypassing the 'clean room' requirement needed for a legitimate independent rewrite. Compounding the issue, the U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear an AI copyright case, reinforcing a 'human authorship' requirement. This creates a three-way legal paradox: the AI output may not be copyrightable at all, it may be an LGPL derivative work, or it may be public domain. If AI-assisted rewrites are accepted as valid relicensing tools, it could effectively nullify copyleft licenses like the GPL.
Table of contents
A clean room rewrite requires a wall that AI bypassesThe Supreme Court created a legal paradox for the maintainersAccepting AI-rewriting as relicensing could spell the end of CopyleftSort: