No, code that has been purely written by an LLM is not copyrightable.
As soon as a human writes a prompt, a correction, a design guideline, a code review, it becomes a question of who has the better lawyer. Which I would bet the billion dollar Corp has the better chances.
so they would have to argue what counts as a transformative work of plagiarism. how much of a stolen painting you have to paint over before it’s no longer stolen.
they have previously argued that llm output is transformative itself, but that’s been struck down. i’m not sure what the next avenue they will take is but they will definitely take it.
pretty much, with the caveat that code that has gone through an llm can’t ever be licensed or copyrighted. it’s basically a public domainifyer.
No, code that has been purely written by an LLM is not copyrightable.
As soon as a human writes a prompt, a correction, a design guideline, a code review, it becomes a question of who has the better lawyer. Which I would bet the billion dollar Corp has the better chances.
so they would have to argue what counts as a transformative work of plagiarism. how much of a stolen painting you have to paint over before it’s no longer stolen.
I’m not a lawyer, no idea what would they argue, I just know the lawyer price beats being right many times.
they have previously argued that llm output is transformative itself, but that’s been struck down. i’m not sure what the next avenue they will take is but they will definitely take it.
That doesn’t seem to stop corporations assuming their software is still theirs even when an LLM wrote a lot of it.
until it goes to court. i am giddy for the day.
If that happens I will be so excited that I will stand as a tripod waiting for the results.