[ezoe]

When the machine automation quality became okay enough, this conflict of interest happens.

His demand of not using his existing work for AI training is nonsense. Because the entire article is stated:

> Portions of this content are ©1998–2025 by individual mozilla.org contributors. Content available under a Creative Commons license.

Didn't he agree on that?

So, this contributor revealed he doesn't understand the license his work is published under. As such, Mozilla must refuse his contribution because he don't understand the idea behind Creative Commons license. His wish granted I guess.

[panny]

You can rescind a license. If you own a property, it is yours. Even if you licensed it to someone, you own it and you can kick someone off. They can later address you for a breach of license, but it's still your property. You own it.

If mozilla wants to tell him that his work was valuable and therefore has grounds to sue him for rescinding the license, they will have a lot of difficulty proving that after their sumobot summarily deleted years of it for no good reason at a whim.

Good for him. He should probably consider suing them for destruction of his work.

[ezoe]

Once your work is published under Creative Commons license, it is irreversible. No matter you have a copyright or not. You can't undo it the fact at one point you published your work in one of Creative Commons license(there are multiple incompatible Creative Commons licenses so it's bit complicated).

You can make updated version of your work to non-CC, but the version you published under CC is CC.

[sakompella]

this is not how CC / FOSS licenses work. if this is how FOSS worked not a soul would use it