Opensource

Okay, I haven't read the article I was just responding to the question about the licensing problem. From what I see in the brief summary here is that this particular item is a rewrite of an existing property, but was given a license incompatible with said property. That is different from whether its license is compatible with Python. I looked up the Python license.

GPL-compatible doesn’t mean that we’re distributing Python under the GPL. All Python licenses, unlike the GPL, let you distribute a modified version without making your changes open source. The GPL-compatible licenses make it possible to combine Python with other software that is released under the GPL; the others don’t.

So I see that point as relevant if inclusion renders Python no-longer GPL-compatible. The real issue appears to me to be that AI makes it very easy to write (theoretically clean-room) implementation of a product - in this case chardet.

The problem here is that what was once something that took real effort and dedicated developer interest to "clone" legally is now easier (perhaps trivial) to do and license differently. This would threaten the GPL model, which is to democratize software and keep it from being entirely owned by entities that could then restrict the software or otherwise destroy the value of competing products.

I'd say there's a real problem here, as people's significant efforts for the greater community could be co-opted and eventually be rendered "pointless" when many people move away from it due to "improved" versions or the "new" versions add features that promote lock-in to their commercialized version. Eventually that open software is no longer viable, and people have to use the proprietary one. I don't know if that is necessarily how things would actually play out, but it would at least dilute the GPL-based licensing power.