I have seen this sentiment, but I don’t know what the world looks like without copyright protections for creative works.
Does open source exist in your vision? How?
My imagination for this topic may not be as expansive as yours, but my interpretation is that if people contribute code to the commons, it will immediately available for any use - including for use by massive corporations.
So it ends up looking like people working for big companies for free.
as soon as it’s modified by a human in nontrivial ways
is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
We know that people are using coding LLMs as slot machines - pull the handle and see if it solves your problem. Where is the human modifying anything? That is a “straight dump” of AI output without modifications.
Honestly, if AI destroys copyright, it’s the best thing it can do.
I have seen this being said, but I really don’t understand it. Just because copyright can be abused doesn’t mean (to me) that we ought to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
If copyright no longer exists, what incentive do people have to share copyleft code at all? It clearly would no longer exist, so can you help me understand how both copyright can be dead and open source exist? Or are you simply accepting that rather than copyright, we are using trade secrets (like the KFC chicken recipe) to protect works?
I don’t see how that helps free software, though. Those programmers got paid. Volunteers didn’t.
It ends up with a weird reverse robin hood situation. LLM vendors steal from the poor, sell that to the rich. Do the rich give back? Only if it is stolen from them.