This overlooks that we already have a policy. “Keep the status quo exactly as is” is a third proposal, and wins by default.
To judge from results, there is so far no known case of AI-enabled license violations in the CPython code base - or of any other kind. I expect there are some anyway, but dating back years.
I don’t seek to change the intents of the current policy in any way, but to be more explicit about what they are, and especially for the benefit of less experienced developers than the core dev team.
There is one extremely visible case of AI-enabled claimed copyright violation (a 100% valid claim to my eyes) in the larger Python ecosystem: the chardet case. Which has nothing to do with verbatim text copying, and in which the putative violator was open about using Claude AI to entirely rewrite a code base under LGPL, and then slap the MIT license on Claude’s output.
But that kind of thing - blatantly in-your-face - can’t be stopped, and no proposal pretends to address it (your proposal doesn’t because no core dev would merge clearly disclosed rewrites (whether or not AI was involved) of an LGPL code base regardless of any stated policy),.