arXiv:2510.16048cs.CYcs.AI2025-10

开源不等于免责,生成式AI需担责

Open Shouldn't Mean Exempt: Open-Source Exceptionalism and Generative AI

  • 为真实非商用研究设定严格合规的豁免条款
  • 开源GenAI可能助长非法行为并加剧环境危害
  • 适合关注AI治理与政策制定的研究者

开源状态不应使生成式人工智能系统免于伦理或法律问责。本文通过分析监管、法律和政策框架,主张开源GenAI应与专有系统遵循相同标准。尽管承认开放对科学进步的价值,但提出仅对符合严格条件的真正非商业研究提供有限豁免。文章批判性地驳斥了开源例外主义的核心论点——即开源能打破垄断、民主化访问并独特推动创新。证据表明,开源GenAI可能助长非法活动,加剧环境损害,并强化现有权力结构。'民主化'与'创新'等修辞常作为未证实的监管豁免依据,且不适用于专有系统。本文最终倡导一种促进负责任AI发展的框架,平衡开放与强有力的法律和伦理保障,并对社会影响进行清醒评估。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Open-source status should not shield generative artificial intelligence systems from ethical or legal accountability. Through a rigorous analysis of regulatory, legal, and policy frameworks, this Article contends that open-source GenAI must be held to the same standards as proprietary systems. While recognizing the value of openness for scientific advancement, I propose a narrowly tailored safe harbor for bona fide, non-commercial research, conditioned on strict compliance with defined criteria. This Article critically examines and refutes the core claims of open-source exceptionalism--namely, that open-source GenAI disrupts entrenched oligopolies, democratizes access, and uniquely drives innovation. The evidence shows that open-source GenAI can facilitate unlawful conduct, exacerbate environmental harms, and reinforce existing power structures. Rhetoric around "democratization" and "innovation" often serves as an unsubstantiated basis for regulatory exemptions not afforded to proprietary systems. This Article ultimately advocates for a framework that promotes responsible AI development, balancing openness with robust legal and ethical safeguards and a clear-eyed assessment of societal impacts.

AI治理开源伦理

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。