Haven't AI crawlers been blatantly ignoring any and all permissions whatsoever? What makes anyone think a license that mentions them will change anything?
this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2025
33 points (100.0% liked)
Programming
22768 readers
37 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This gives legal backing to any lawsuits against ai companies.
Currently everything on the Internet is assumed to be free. Robots.txt is just a suggestion and not legally enforceable. I assume RSL is supposed to communicate terms of use explicitly, like a EULA.
It's like open source licenses on github. Sure you can access the source, but here are the rules you have to follow. Yes, a lot of companies still ignore it, notably GNU licensed software has been abused by the likes of Apple.
Oooh, ok. I hope it helps then!
Currently everything on the Internet is assumed to be free.
This isn't true at all. Content on websites is protected by copyright laws as well.
Currently everything on the Internet is assumed to be free. Robots.txt is just a suggestion and not legally enforceable. I assume RSL is supposed to communicate terms of use explicitly, like a EULA.
Robots is just a suggestion and so is this because scaraper never cared about legality of things. All this thing does is make license more easily accessible but consequently, do we want to make it easy for them in the first place? Make scrapers work for it.
Exactly this. I doubt the effectiveness of a measure like this. Without enforcement, explicit and public cooperation from AI scrapers, consequences/accountability, and legal backing, it's just theater.
The equivalent of a strongly worded letter.
By itself is not sufficient, I think It is meant as a startpoint to continue building in the future.
It's hard to build when you have no monetary support anyway.
It's complementary to robots.txt.
- It's weird that it's XML, in 2025.
- It's weird that it doesn't use the .well-known/ prefix which has trended in the last decade for placement of files like this.
- It's weird that it canonically uses the generic "license.xml" file name instead of "license.rsl" or "rsl.xml" or something that more clearly indicates its semantics.
But I do like the idea of having some widely adopted conventional way of expressing, in unambiguous terms, which usages are expressly prohibited, and that AI training is among them.
What's wrong with XML ? You use HTML, right ?
Well it looks like another paywall / DRM gateway for knowledge that is not opensource. The only open thing they have is .org domain.
Is this a robot.txt alternative?
Basically. It has an authentication layer. Will watch with interest to see how adoption goes.
"several heavyweight publishers and tech companies -- Reddit, Yahoo, People, O'Reilly Media, Medium, and Ziff Davis (ZDNET's parent company) -- have developed a response: the Really Simple Licensing (RSL) standard."