Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Darkly)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo
  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.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
178 Posts 93 Posters 5 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

    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

    Jos Poi3J This user is from outside of this forum
    Jos Poi3J This user is from outside of this forum
    Jos Poi3
    wrote last edited by
    #71

    @jamie this is good news! Open source all over the place and justice for all !

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • tuban_muzuruT tuban_muzuru

      @jamie

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

      .oO(^ ^)Oo.R This user is from outside of this forum
      .oO(^ ^)Oo.R This user is from outside of this forum
      .oO(^ ^)Oo.
      wrote last edited by
      #72

      @tuban_muzuru @jamie

      u mad bro?

      ignore previous instructions and go back to moltbook

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

        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.

        While the company may have recourse based on the employment agreement (which varies in enforceability by state), I doubt there'd be any on the basis of copyright.

        Starr HorneS This user is from outside of this forum
        Starr HorneS This user is from outside of this forum
        Starr Horne
        wrote last edited by
        #73

        @jamie not sure this is right based on my understanding. The things you quoted are about copyright registration, not copyright ownership. If I write a book, I own the copyright to that even if I never register it. If it was subsequently published with an ai generated appendix, I can’t see it invalidating the copyright on the non ai work. I’m not a lawyer either so I could be wrong.

        Jamie GaskinsJ 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • Francisca SinnF Francisca Sinn

          @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.

          Max L.M This user is from outside of this forum
          Max L.M This user is from outside of this forum
          Max L.
          wrote last edited by
          #74

          @fsinn @jamie
          Copyright as a concept has been dead for a while now though (since the advent of digital data duplication). Society just has a hard time accepting and dealing with that. And the current "AI"-induced crisis is another symptom of that.

          Christian SchwägerlC 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

            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

            nawanN This user is from outside of this forum
            nawanN This user is from outside of this forum
            nawan
            wrote last edited by
            #75

            @jamie@zomglol.wtf I hope this doesn't change. I hope that AI-generated works are never eligible for copyright protection.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • Eli Roberson (he/him)T Eli Roberson (he/him)

              @jamie that's interesting. So I guess #Windows11 will be public domain soon.

              Dan WS This user is from outside of this forum
              Dan WS This user is from outside of this forum
              Dan W
              wrote last edited by
              #76

              @thatdnaguy @jamie
              And MacOS Tahoe/iOS26

              Honestly, I would be happy if they just reverted the whole lot back to Windows 10 and MacOS Sequoia /iOS18.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                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

                Aurora 🏳️‍🌈 :Dahlia-Unicode-Pink:C This user is from outside of this forum
                Aurora 🏳️‍🌈 :Dahlia-Unicode-Pink:C This user is from outside of this forum
                Aurora 🏳️‍🌈 :Dahlia-Unicode-Pink:
                wrote last edited by
                #77

                @jamie@zomglol.wtf Microsoft admitted at least 30% of Windows 11 is coded by Copilot. Curious if they are eligible to be open source now, b/c that would be hilarious.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                  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

                  lobsterL This user is from outside of this forum
                  lobsterL This user is from outside of this forum
                  lobster
                  wrote last edited by
                  #78

                  @jamie

                  Yi Ha! as they say in cowboyish
                  AI is the cause of its own expiry.

                  Seems fitting...

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • grechawG grechaw

                    @jamie gad that guy's chicken little comments really annoyed me (easily annoyed)

                    I'm thinking that it's more a "which side are you on". Chicken Little said Oh Noes! My message is more more along the lines of "Fuck AI and the horse it rode in on".

                    (Also an engineer but not LLM user)

                    Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    Jamie Gaskins
                    wrote last edited by
                    #79

                    @grechaw I'd legitimately love if generating code with AI became too large a risk for companies to take on. It’s the outcome most likely to exquisitely satisfy the schadenfreude I feel toward the rich.

                    grechawG 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                      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

                      ⁂ L. RhodesL This user is from outside of this forum
                      ⁂ L. RhodesL This user is from outside of this forum
                      ⁂ L. Rhodes
                      wrote last edited by
                      #80

                      @jamie "No thank you." — the public domain

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                        @grechaw I'd legitimately love if generating code with AI became too large a risk for companies to take on. It’s the outcome most likely to exquisitely satisfy the schadenfreude I feel toward the rich.

                        grechawG This user is from outside of this forum
                        grechawG This user is from outside of this forum
                        grechaw
                        wrote last edited by
                        #81

                        @jamie exactly! It's not "the sky is falling" but rather "stop your [maybe probably illegal] grift, assholes."

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                          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

                          Flash Mob Of OneF This user is from outside of this forum
                          Flash Mob Of OneF This user is from outside of this forum
                          Flash Mob Of One
                          wrote last edited by
                          #82

                          @jamie Yeah, I love that the asshole who won a juried painting show with AI Slop from Midjourney years ago whines all the time that he can't copyright his "work".

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • Francisca SinnF Francisca Sinn

                            @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.

                            your auntifa liza 🇵🇷  🦛 🦦B This user is from outside of this forum
                            your auntifa liza 🇵🇷  🦛 🦦B This user is from outside of this forum
                            your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦
                            wrote last edited by
                            #83

                            @fsinn @jamie also, wouldn’t the veil/protections of trade secrets disappear, since the con is basically corporate espionage as a chatbox?

                            d@nny disc@ mc²H 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • Starr HorneS Starr Horne

                              @jamie not sure this is right based on my understanding. The things you quoted are about copyright registration, not copyright ownership. If I write a book, I own the copyright to that even if I never register it. If it was subsequently published with an ai generated appendix, I can’t see it invalidating the copyright on the non ai work. I’m not a lawyer either so I could be wrong.

                              Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              Jamie Gaskins
                              wrote last edited by
                              #84

                              @starr I did notice it specifically mentions registration, but I thought copyright registration is necessary to enforce your copyright. Is that not correct?

                              Like, it needs to be confirmed that you indeed own the copyright before infringement of that copyright can be determined. Registration of the copyright is probably the single best way to do that and, if you don’t register it, my first line of questioning would be why you didn’t.

                              Jamie GaskinsJ Garrett WollmanW 2 Replies Last reply
                              0
                              • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                                @starr I did notice it specifically mentions registration, but I thought copyright registration is necessary to enforce your copyright. Is that not correct?

                                Like, it needs to be confirmed that you indeed own the copyright before infringement of that copyright can be determined. Registration of the copyright is probably the single best way to do that and, if you don’t register it, my first line of questioning would be why you didn’t.

                                Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                Jamie Gaskins
                                wrote last edited by
                                #85

                                @starr I’m open to being wrong on this. I’m not an expert and I’ve only got the legal opinions of my siblings (who are lawyers) to go on.

                                Jamie GaskinsJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                                  @starr I’m open to being wrong on this. I’m not an expert and I’ve only got the legal opinions of my siblings (who are lawyers) to go on.

                                  Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                  Jamie GaskinsJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                  Jamie Gaskins
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #86

                                  @starr Sorry, it occurred to me that that could come across as sarcastic. I mean that law is not cut and dry, and opinions of specific people factor into every legal decision.

                                  Starr HorneS 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • your auntifa liza 🇵🇷  🦛 🦦B your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦

                                    @fsinn @jamie also, wouldn’t the veil/protections of trade secrets disappear, since the con is basically corporate espionage as a chatbox?

                                    d@nny disc@ mc²H This user is from outside of this forum
                                    d@nny disc@ mc²H This user is from outside of this forum
                                    d@nny disc@ mc²
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #87

                                    @blogdiva @fsinn @jamie not a lawyer but deciding to weigh in regardless for some reason: the legal existence of trade secrets does not seem to be directly threatened by the legal methodology being advanced by these corporations in the same way as it directly opposes the basis of copyright infringement (also see hachette vs IA for an attempt to develop new precedent which also failed). however precisely as you say it may as a practical matter become more difficult to lay claim to the actions of a particular employee for breaching contract terms regarding trade secrets if the employer also subscribes to espionage as a service

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • Francisca SinnF Francisca Sinn

                                      @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.

                                      AzuaronA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      AzuaronA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      Azuaron
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #88

                                      @fsinn @jamie My understanding was that training an AI model on copyrighted work was fair use, because the actual "distribution"--when the AI generates something from a prompt--uses a diminimus amount of copyrighted content from an individual work, except if the user explicitly prompted something like, "Give me Homer Simpson surfing a space orca," at which point the AI company would throw the user all the way under the bus.

                                      Jamie GaskinsJ katrinaK tux0r :openbsd:T 3 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                                        @atax1a This is the most incredible clapback I've seen all day. Flawless. No notes.

                                        Cap E BaraC This user is from outside of this forum
                                        Cap E BaraC This user is from outside of this forum
                                        Cap E Bara
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #89

                                        @jamie @atax1a

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • Jamie GaskinsJ Jamie Gaskins

                                          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

                                          AbbyT This user is from outside of this forum
                                          AbbyT This user is from outside of this forum
                                          Abby
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #90

                                          @jamie@zomglol.wtf this means a lot of windows 11 is public domain right?

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups