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.
  • 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
                • xgranade@wandering.shopX xgranade@wandering.shop

                  @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 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
                  #40

                  @xgranade @jamie @aeva I think it's a much stronger case for the example rejected registrations that they show on the next page, which are exclusively about copyrightability of images.

                  It's largely legally untested AFAICT but based on how eagerly US courts have swallowed up the fair-use arguments of the vendors of these models, I don't have a lot of faith they would play hard-ball with a litigant who has code that has been established to have been generated, but who argues sufficiency from a "trust me, bro" perspective. (IANAL either, of course)

                  I would *love* to be wrong about that though, and I'm glad that the Copyright Office has drawn a clear line in the sand on the general matter (and wish more people in tech had read either the publications themselves, or this CRS summary of same)

                  aeva@mastodon.gamedev.placeA 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

                    ulveon@derg.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                    ulveon@derg.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                    ulveon@derg.social
                    schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                    #41

                    @jamie@zomglol.wtf and how do you know if something is AI?

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

                      @xgranade @jamie @aeva I think it's a much stronger case for the example rejected registrations that they show on the next page, which are exclusively about copyrightability of images.

                      It's largely legally untested AFAICT but based on how eagerly US courts have swallowed up the fair-use arguments of the vendors of these models, I don't have a lot of faith they would play hard-ball with a litigant who has code that has been established to have been generated, but who argues sufficiency from a "trust me, bro" perspective. (IANAL either, of course)

                      I would *love* to be wrong about that though, and I'm glad that the Copyright Office has drawn a clear line in the sand on the general matter (and wish more people in tech had read either the publications themselves, or this CRS summary of same)

                      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
                      #42

                      @SnoopJ @xgranade @jamie ok, but i refuse to retract my pointing at the screen and nelson-from-the-simpsons-laugh that the original post inspired

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

                        @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 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
                        #43

                        @jamie the US needs a new constitution, but the right wingers, the religious gooners, and the billionaires should have no say in it.

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

                          @SnoopJ @xgranade @jamie ok, but i refuse to retract my pointing at the screen and nelson-from-the-simpsons-laugh that the original post inspired

                          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
                          #44

                          @aeva @xgranade @jamie agreed, you can have my HAW-HAW when you pry it from my cold dead throat

                          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

                            gary_alderson@infosec.exchangeG This user is from outside of this forum
                            gary_alderson@infosec.exchangeG This user is from outside of this forum
                            gary_alderson@infosec.exchange
                            schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                            #45

                            @jamie china is the main producer of models with open weights, open source ai, china is pushing the evolution of ai forward - what's next? probably 10x compute for smb sector

                            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

                              bougiewonderland@freeradical.zoneB This user is from outside of this forum
                              bougiewonderland@freeradical.zoneB This user is from outside of this forum
                              bougiewonderland@freeradical.zone
                              schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                              #46

                              @jamie so… Windows is now fair game?

                              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

                                lexinova@cyberplace.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                lexinova@cyberplace.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                lexinova@cyberplace.social
                                schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                #47

                                @jamie in the US, outside of the US exist, and when i don't like AI, until other country rules AI code is not copyrightable ... it remain copyrightable on the whole world BUT US.

                                so not it does not automatically become public domain

                                (And again i'm against AI).

                                jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 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.

                                  fsinn@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  fsinn@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  fsinn@mas.to
                                  schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                  #48

                                  @jamie I *am* an IP lawyer and I (along with many others) have been saying it for a while, that if the position the “AI” co’s are taking with respect to the legality of scraping “publicly available” materials were true (that all “publicly available” materials are “public domain” free to be used as raw materials without consent required), then copyright ceases to exist and all their own materials will be free for everyone else to use the very first time they’re leaked. That’ll be fun for the co.

                                  jamie@zomglol.wtfJ max@gruene.socialM blogdiva@mastodon.socialB azuaron@cyberpunk.lolA christianschwaegerl@mastodon.socialC 7 Antworten 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

                                    saxnot@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    saxnot@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    saxnot@chaos.social
                                    schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                    #49

                                    @jamie where does it say "the entire codebase"?
                                    I reas it exactly opposite.

                                    Copyright on own contributions

                                    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

                                      madaeas@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      madaeas@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      madaeas@mastodon.social
                                      schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                      #50

                                      @jamie win win for the creatives and for slop-craft

                                      1 Antwort 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.

                                        atax1a@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        atax1a@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        atax1a@infosec.exchange
                                        schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                        #51

                                        @tuban_muzuru i hope you write a program some day

                                        @jamie

                                        jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 1 Antwort 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.

                                          loddite@floofy.techL This user is from outside of this forum
                                          loddite@floofy.techL This user is from outside of this forum
                                          loddite@floofy.tech
                                          schrieb zuletzt editiert von
                                          #52

                                          @tuban_muzuru @jamie stop fighting! cant you see youre tearing us apart!!!

                                          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