Mastodon Skip to content
  • Home
  • Aktuell
  • Tags
  • Über dieses Forum
Einklappen
Grafik mit zwei überlappenden Sprechblasen, eine grün und eine lila.
Abspeckgeflüster – Forum für Menschen mit Gewicht(ung)

Kostenlos. Werbefrei. Menschlich. Dein Abnehmforum.

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. If you use AI-generated code, you currently cannot claim copyright on it in the US.

If you use AI-generated code, you currently cannot claim copyright on it in the US.

Geplant Angeheftet Gesperrt Verschoben Uncategorized
180 Beiträge 94 Kommentatoren 1 Aufrufe
  • Älteste zuerst
  • Neuste zuerst
  • Meiste Stimmen
Antworten
  • In einem neuen Thema antworten
Anmelden zum Antworten
Dieses Thema wurde gelöscht. Nur Nutzer mit entsprechenden Rechten können es sehen.
  • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

    @tuban_muzuru I don't have a JD, that's correct. I do, however, have two siblings that do and this entire thread came out of a conversation with one of them.

    And no, I will do you no favors. You came into *my* mentions. I had no idea you existed 40 minutes ago. So I owe you nothing. You'll just have to find a way to accept that I will continue posting my thoughts on my own account on my own server.

    tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
    tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
    tuban_muzuru@beige.party
    schrieb zuletzt editiert von
    #20

    @jamie

    Shrug. Here's a tip - when you put up a para like this one: "It'll be interesting to see what happens when a company pisses off an employee to the point where that person creates a public repo containing all the company's AI-generated code. I guarantee what's AI-generated and what's human-written isn't called out anywhere in the code, meaning the entire codebase becomes public domain."

    - I can make the observation you're being a Chicken Little. You guaranteed it.

    jamie@zomglol.wtfJ dusk@todon.euD 2 Antworten Letzte Antwort
    0
    • oay@mastodon.socialO oay@mastodon.social

      @tuban_muzuru @jamie if youre a competent programmer you will absolutely not be asking an LLM for spec. you will read documentation.

      tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
      tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
      tuban_muzuru@beige.party
      schrieb zuletzt editiert von
      #21

      @oay @jamie

      You do write spec first, yes?

      oay@mastodon.socialO 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
      0
      • tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT tuban_muzuru@beige.party

        @oay @jamie

        You do write spec first, yes?

        oay@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
        oay@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
        oay@mastodon.social
        schrieb zuletzt editiert von
        #22

        @tuban_muzuru @jamie not with LLM

        1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
        0
        • tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT tuban_muzuru@beige.party

          @jamie

          Shrug. Here's a tip - when you put up a para like this one: "It'll be interesting to see what happens when a company pisses off an employee to the point where that person creates a public repo containing all the company's AI-generated code. I guarantee what's AI-generated and what's human-written isn't called out anywhere in the code, meaning the entire codebase becomes public domain."

          - I can make the observation you're being a Chicken Little. You guaranteed it.

          jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jamie@zomglol.wtf
          schrieb zuletzt editiert von
          #23

          @tuban_muzuru The guarantee is that the parts of the codebase that aren't written by humans are not called out. You can read into the rest however you like.

          tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
          0
          • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

            @tuban_muzuru The guarantee is that the parts of the codebase that aren't written by humans are not called out. You can read into the rest however you like.

            tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
            tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
            tuban_muzuru@beige.party
            schrieb zuletzt editiert von
            #24

            @jamie

            .... how can you distinguish between 'em?

            jamie@zomglol.wtfJ lispi314@udongein.xyzL 2 Antworten Letzte Antwort
            0
            • tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT tuban_muzuru@beige.party

              @jamie

              .... how can you distinguish between 'em?

              jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jamie@zomglol.wtf
              schrieb zuletzt editiert von
              #25

              @tuban_muzuru You came into my mentions with guns blazing, so you'll have to forgive me if I don't consider that to be an honest question.

              tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
              0
              • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                @tuban_muzuru You came into my mentions with guns blazing, so you'll have to forgive me if I don't consider that to be an honest question.

                tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
                tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT This user is from outside of this forum
                tuban_muzuru@beige.party
                schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                #26

                @jamie

                Stop whining. You and about seventy zillion terrified sheep running around here bleating about the Terrible AI monster under the bed.

                jamie@zomglol.wtfJ atax1a@infosec.exchangeA loddite@floofy.techL rick@tinnies.clubR cancel@merveilles.townC 5 Antworten Letzte Antwort
                0
                • tuban_muzuru@beige.partyT tuban_muzuru@beige.party

                  @jamie

                  Stop whining. You and about seventy zillion terrified sheep running around here bleating about the Terrible AI monster under the bed.

                  jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jamie@zomglol.wtf
                  schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                  #27

                  @tuban_muzuru Buddy, you're the only one that's been whining this whole time. Whining about what I said, whining about "get a Claude subscription".

                  I was literally talking about "I'm gonna have popcorn ready". I don't know how you read fear from that.

                  It seems more like you feel attacked because someone criticized AI. You've been the only one alarmed in this whole thread.

                  jaredwhite@indieweb.socialJ 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                  0
                  • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                    FWIW I'm not a lawyer and I'm not recommending that you do this. 😄 Even if companies have no legal standing on copyright, their legal team will try it. It *will* cost you money.

                    But man, oh man, I'm gonna have popcorn ready for when someone inevitably pulls this move.

                    emma@orbital.horseE This user is from outside of this forum
                    emma@orbital.horseE This user is from outside of this forum
                    emma@orbital.horse
                    schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                    #28

                    @jamie the corporations own the Supreme Court of the US who will cheerfully make up new law out of whatever Clarence Thomas shat that morning.

                    jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                    0
                    • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                      If you use AI-generated code, you currently cannot claim copyright on it in the US. If you fail to disclose/disclaim exactly which parts were not written by a human, you forfeit your copyright claim on *the entire codebase*.

                      This means copyright notices and even licenses folks are putting on their vibe-coded GitHub repos are unenforceable. The AI-generated code, and possibly the whole project, becomes public domain.

                      Source: https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10922/LSB10922.8.pdf

                      dancingtreefrog@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                      dancingtreefrog@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                      dancingtreefrog@mastodon.social
                      schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                      #29

                      @jamie And Microsoft executives keep bragging about how much Windows code is being written by AIs?

                      Count me as one person NOT AT ALL interested in Windows, regardless of any copyright status.

                      1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                      0
                      • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                        If you use AI-generated code, you currently cannot claim copyright on it in the US. If you fail to disclose/disclaim exactly which parts were not written by a human, you forfeit your copyright claim on *the entire codebase*.

                        This means copyright notices and even licenses folks are putting on their vibe-coded GitHub repos are unenforceable. The AI-generated code, and possibly the whole project, becomes public domain.

                        Source: https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10922/LSB10922.8.pdf

                        leeloo@chaosfem.twL This user is from outside of this forum
                        leeloo@chaosfem.twL This user is from outside of this forum
                        leeloo@chaosfem.tw
                        schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                        #30

                        @jamie
                        That doesn't sound quite right. The code "AI" generates are stolen from other people, presumably they still have their copyright.

                        Also, even if we pretend that it is actually generated by a machine, so is the output of a compiler. Is Microsoft Office in the public domain, because the executable was generated by a compiler?

                        jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                        0
                        • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                          If you use AI-generated code, you currently cannot claim copyright on it in the US. If you fail to disclose/disclaim exactly which parts were not written by a human, you forfeit your copyright claim on *the entire codebase*.

                          This means copyright notices and even licenses folks are putting on their vibe-coded GitHub repos are unenforceable. The AI-generated code, and possibly the whole project, becomes public domain.

                          Source: https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10922/LSB10922.8.pdf

                          macronaut@mas.toM This user is from outside of this forum
                          macronaut@mas.toM This user is from outside of this forum
                          macronaut@mas.to
                          schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                          #31

                          @jamie 🤔 Microslop, allegedly, vibe coded up to 30% of the Windows 11 codebase using genAI. Theoretically anyone working for Microslop with access to the codebase can upload the whole codebase without recourse?

                          jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                          0
                          • emma@orbital.horseE emma@orbital.horse

                            @jamie the corporations own the Supreme Court of the US who will cheerfully make up new law out of whatever Clarence Thomas shat that morning.

                            jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                            jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                            jamie@zomglol.wtf
                            schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                            #32

                            @emma Oh yeah, shit's gonna get weird for a while and I think a lot of legislation going in during this administration as well as recent SCOTUS cases will need to be revisited. Ideally after also instituting laws around conflicts of interest with government officials that don't carve out exceptions for, oh I dunno, members of Congress, for example.

                            Basically, I want the different branches of the government to fight each other again rather than the different parties.

                            emma@orbital.horseE 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                            0
                            • leeloo@chaosfem.twL leeloo@chaosfem.tw

                              @jamie
                              That doesn't sound quite right. The code "AI" generates are stolen from other people, presumably they still have their copyright.

                              Also, even if we pretend that it is actually generated by a machine, so is the output of a compiler. Is Microsoft Office in the public domain, because the executable was generated by a compiler?

                              jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              jamie@zomglol.wtf
                              schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                              #33

                              @leeloo Last I heard, the holders of the copyrights on the material that the LLMs are trained on are being told to get fucked.

                              The class action lawsuit that Anthropic lost was decided not because they trained their models on stolen copyrighted material, but because they stored copies of that material to keep training their models on. My understanding is that it was the storage specifically that violated copyright and that, if they'd deleted that data they'd have been legally clear.

                              leeloo@chaosfem.twL 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                              0
                              • macronaut@mas.toM macronaut@mas.to

                                @jamie 🤔 Microslop, allegedly, vibe coded up to 30% of the Windows 11 codebase using genAI. Theoretically anyone working for Microslop with access to the codebase can upload the whole codebase without recourse?

                                jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                jamie@zomglol.wtfJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                jamie@zomglol.wtf
                                schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                #34

                                @macronaut Possibly. The next two posts in the thread have a little more detail on my understanding of the current state of affairs there.

                                https://zomglol.wtf/@jamie/116059593870764508

                                1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                0
                                • skorpy@chaos.socialS skorpy@chaos.social shared this topic
                                • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                                  If you use AI-generated code, you currently cannot claim copyright on it in the US. If you fail to disclose/disclaim exactly which parts were not written by a human, you forfeit your copyright claim on *the entire codebase*.

                                  This means copyright notices and even licenses folks are putting on their vibe-coded GitHub repos are unenforceable. The AI-generated code, and possibly the whole project, becomes public domain.

                                  Source: https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10922/LSB10922.8.pdf

                                  snoopj@hachyderm.ioS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  snoopj@hachyderm.ioS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  snoopj@hachyderm.io
                                  schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                  #35

                                  @jamie @aeva I suspect that courts would not be favorable to this reading, and would buy the (bullshit, IMO) argument that sufficient human interaction with the code "heals" the copyrightability of the result, and more importantly that they would not press the applicant to show much work when it comes to "sufficient" (that is, I suspect many judges would accept "I edited the code at all" as meeting the sufficiency criterion)

                                  but we're only going to find out if and when it's tested. The Copyright Office is doing the best they can do and making it clear that they won't let "AI" waste their time with copyright registrations (which are not required to legally protect a work, they're just paperwork really)

                                  aeva@mastodon.gamedev.placeA 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                  0
                                  • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                                    @leeloo Last I heard, the holders of the copyrights on the material that the LLMs are trained on are being told to get fucked.

                                    The class action lawsuit that Anthropic lost was decided not because they trained their models on stolen copyrighted material, but because they stored copies of that material to keep training their models on. My understanding is that it was the storage specifically that violated copyright and that, if they'd deleted that data they'd have been legally clear.

                                    leeloo@chaosfem.twL This user is from outside of this forum
                                    leeloo@chaosfem.twL This user is from outside of this forum
                                    leeloo@chaosfem.tw
                                    schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                    #36

                                    @jamie
                                    Well, someone still needs to decide at some point whether to abolish copyright or start enforcing it again, and at that point it could become a huge problem for anyone who has incorporated stolen code into their code base.

                                    jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                    0
                                    • snoopj@hachyderm.ioS snoopj@hachyderm.io

                                      @jamie @aeva I suspect that courts would not be favorable to this reading, and would buy the (bullshit, IMO) argument that sufficient human interaction with the code "heals" the copyrightability of the result, and more importantly that they would not press the applicant to show much work when it comes to "sufficient" (that is, I suspect many judges would accept "I edited the code at all" as meeting the sufficiency criterion)

                                      but we're only going to find out if and when it's tested. The Copyright Office is doing the best they can do and making it clear that they won't let "AI" waste their time with copyright registrations (which are not required to legally protect a work, they're just paperwork really)

                                      aeva@mastodon.gamedev.placeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      aeva@mastodon.gamedev.placeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      aeva@mastodon.gamedev.place
                                      schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                      #37

                                      @SnoopJ @jamie i think the point is this is a possible interpretation that has precedence already

                                      xgranade@wandering.shopX 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                      0
                                      • aeva@mastodon.gamedev.placeA aeva@mastodon.gamedev.place

                                        @SnoopJ @jamie i think the point is this is a possible interpretation that has precedence already

                                        xgranade@wandering.shopX This user is from outside of this forum
                                        xgranade@wandering.shopX This user is from outside of this forum
                                        xgranade@wandering.shop
                                        schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                        #38

                                        @SnoopJ @jamie @aeva That was my read as well. IANAL, but my lay understanding was that even if the courts eventually don't act favorably towards an argument, that it exists and has precedent is enough to create legal risk?

                                        snoopj@hachyderm.ioS 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                        0
                                        • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                                          If you use AI-generated code, you currently cannot claim copyright on it in the US. If you fail to disclose/disclaim exactly which parts were not written by a human, you forfeit your copyright claim on *the entire codebase*.

                                          This means copyright notices and even licenses folks are putting on their vibe-coded GitHub repos are unenforceable. The AI-generated code, and possibly the whole project, becomes public domain.

                                          Source: https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10922/LSB10922.8.pdf

                                          c0dec0dec0de@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          c0dec0dec0de@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          c0dec0dec0de@hachyderm.io
                                          schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                          #39

                                          @jamie I wonder if that’ll kill the use of “AI” at work

                                          jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                          0
                                          Antworten
                                          • In einem neuen Thema antworten
                                          Anmelden zum Antworten
                                          • Älteste zuerst
                                          • Neuste zuerst
                                          • Meiste Stimmen



                                          Copyright (c) 2025 abSpecktrum (@abspecklog@fedimonster.de)

                                          Erstellt mit Schlaflosigkeit, Kaffee, Brokkoli & ♥

                                          Impressum | Datenschutzerklärung | Nutzungsbedingungen

                                          • Anmelden

                                          • Du hast noch kein Konto? Registrieren

                                          • Anmelden oder registrieren, um zu suchen
                                          • Erster Beitrag
                                            Letzter Beitrag
                                          0
                                          • Home
                                          • Aktuell
                                          • Tags
                                          • Über dieses Forum