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 (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  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
147 Posts 82 Posters 0 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.
  • wollman@mastodon.socialW wollman@mastodon.social

    @jamie @starr Registration is required to sue to enforce a copyright, yes. The copyright exists without registration, but as soon as you want to sue, you have to provide the registration number or a copy of the Register of Copyright's formal denial (which you can then litigate).

    What registration gives you is "statutory damages": for infringement that occurs prior to registration, you can only receive *actual* damages, not the act's fixed penalty plus treble damages and costs.

    wollman@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
    wollman@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
    wollman@mastodon.social
    wrote last edited by
    #103

    @jamie @starr This was a big deal for authors in the Anthropic suit: those whose works had not been registered for whatever reason prior to the infringement were excluded from the settlement because they would only have been entitled to at most a few dollars in lost royalties, a fact-bound question not conducive to class action and for which they could not be awarded fees. (Foreign authors are understandably angry about this.)

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

      @starr Also, are the full contents of all registered copyrights visible at the Library of Congress? I assumed that was patents only but I used to get copyright and patents confused a lot and this may be one of those things I've been carrying incorrectly in my mind.

      wollman@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
      wollman@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
      wollman@mastodon.social
      wrote last edited by
      #104

      @jamie @starr No. You must deposit the work with the Copyright Office but the rules vary depending on the kind of work and the nature of the claim. For very voluminous non-literary works, the Office has long allowed deposit of a representative sample. While the Copyright Office is part of the Library of Congress, copyright deposits do not become part of the Library's public collections. (The Librarian can require publishers to deposit copies of specific works for public access.)

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • dwineman@xoxo.zoneD dwineman@xoxo.zone

        @jamie It may not be copyrightable but it can still count as one of the other forms of IP, such as trade secrets, which as a former employee you can very easily be prosecuted for divulging. And there are usually NDAs on top of that. (sorry, replied to wrong post before)

        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
        wrote last edited by
        #105

        @dwineman Yeah, there are a few approaches to IP law that they'd still have available. But even then, the discovery process would probably require them to air out some of their laundry, too.

        IIRC one of the AI platforms was sued recently and settled out of court. Someone on here pointed out that they likely did that to avoid discovery, which would enter a lot of internal data into public record. I'm fuzzy on the details, but the gist was companies generally don't like to go to court over this.

        dwineman@xoxo.zoneD 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

          @dwineman Yeah, there are a few approaches to IP law that they'd still have available. But even then, the discovery process would probably require them to air out some of their laundry, too.

          IIRC one of the AI platforms was sued recently and settled out of court. Someone on here pointed out that they likely did that to avoid discovery, which would enter a lot of internal data into public record. I'm fuzzy on the details, but the gist was companies generally don't like to go to court over this.

          dwineman@xoxo.zoneD This user is from outside of this forum
          dwineman@xoxo.zoneD This user is from outside of this forum
          dwineman@xoxo.zone
          wrote last edited by
          #106

          @jamie The problem is that as an individual, that process would likely bankrupt you well before it even got to discovery, and the company knows that.

          jamie@zomglol.wtfJ 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • jaredwhite@indieweb.socialJ jaredwhite@indieweb.social

            @jamie The funny thing about this whole thread is apparently I'd already blocked that guy some time ago, so I'm only seeing your side of the conversation. And…that's all I need to know anyway. 😅

            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
            wrote last edited by
            #107

            @jaredwhite Yeah, you didn't miss much. Mainly he was replying to things I wasn't saying. Easiest argument I've had on the internet in years.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • dwineman@xoxo.zoneD dwineman@xoxo.zone

              @jamie The problem is that as an individual, that process would likely bankrupt you well before it even got to discovery, and the company knows that.

              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
              wrote last edited by
              #108

              @dwineman 100%. They don't need a favorable judgement to silence you.

              1 Reply Last reply
              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

                Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                viss@mastodon.socialV This user is from outside of this forum
                viss@mastodon.socialV This user is from outside of this forum
                viss@mastodon.social
                wrote last edited by
                #109

                @jamie RIP microsoft

                1 Reply Last reply
                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.

                  cancel@merveilles.townC This user is from outside of this forum
                  cancel@merveilles.townC This user is from outside of this forum
                  cancel@merveilles.town
                  wrote last edited by
                  #110

                  @tuban_muzuru @jamie as a random viewer of this thread, you come off as utterly insufferable, which might not be what you think you come off as, and so you might want to reconsider your behavior

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  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

                    Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                    luboganev@androiddev.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                    luboganev@androiddev.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                    luboganev@androiddev.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #111

                    @jamie it's the same in Germany. You can't copyright anything that isn't created by a human.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    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

                      Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                      machinelordzero@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                      machinelordzero@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                      machinelordzero@mastodon.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #112

                      @jamie Anything AI-generated is free, BUT anything AI-generated is also worse than simply worthless.
                      *shrug*

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      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

                        Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                        j9t@mas.toJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        j9t@mas.toJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        j9t@mas.to
                        wrote last edited by
                        #113

                        @jamie, so if a code review agent corrects a variable name in a proprietary 5M LOC project and that AI edit is not documented (where?), the entire project becomes public domain?

                        (Asking not you specifically but to entertain the thought such a law could be written without nuance.)

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        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

                          Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                          diazona@techhub.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                          diazona@techhub.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                          diazona@techhub.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #114

                          @jamie Hmm... this sounds like it's saying is that if a work (e.g. a code base) includes AI-generated content and doesn't identify which parts of it were AI-generated, the whole work and every part of the work, even the human-created parts, become ineligible for copyright. I believe that's wrong. (Maybe misleading, at best, if you meant it in some other way.) I mean, I can't say so authoritatively, since I'm a copyright nerd, not a lawyer, but I'm becoming increasingly convinced the more I look into it. If nothing else, it'd be a quick way to invalidate anybody's copyright on anything by just combining it with some AI-generated content and releasing the combination.

                          I think a more accurate statement would be that if you fail to disclose which parts were not written by a human, the copyright status of the work is unclear. The human contributions are still copyrighted by their authors, but there are some things that can't be done with the work as a whole without knowing which contributions those are.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • azuaron@cyberpunk.lolA azuaron@cyberpunk.lol

                            @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.

                            katrinatransfem@mastodon.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                            katrinatransfem@mastodon.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                            katrinatransfem@mastodon.social
                            wrote last edited by
                            #115

                            @Azuaron @fsinn @jamie But, they don't have a licence to use the training material, and the act of gathering that material is mass copyright infringement.

                            azuaron@cyberpunk.lolA 1 Reply Last reply
                            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

                              Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                              io@blahaj.zoneI This user is from outside of this forum
                              io@blahaj.zoneI This user is from outside of this forum
                              io@blahaj.zone
                              wrote last edited by
                              #116

                              @jamie@zomglol.wtf Is Windows FOSS now?

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              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

                                Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                                dolanor@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                dolanor@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                dolanor@hachyderm.io
                                wrote last edited by
                                #117

                                @jamie so windows 11 source code is public domain now?
                                What about AWS?

                                travisfw@fosstodon.orgT 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                                  @Azuaron @fsinn The argument has been that the model doesn't contain the copyrighted works directly. Like, you can't grep the model file on disk for a passage from a book it can still somehow reproduce.

                                  It's a ridiculous argument, though, because the models deal in numbers, not text. Those numbers are converted to text for human consumption only, so of course it won't contain the raw text anywhere in the model.

                                  christianschwaegerl@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                  christianschwaegerl@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                  christianschwaegerl@mastodon.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #118

                                  @jamie @Azuaron @fsinn It's like saying sausages are vegan as long as they do not contain visible body parts.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • jamie@zomglol.wtfJ jamie@zomglol.wtf

                                    @Azuaron @fsinn The argument has been that the model doesn't contain the copyrighted works directly. Like, you can't grep the model file on disk for a passage from a book it can still somehow reproduce.

                                    It's a ridiculous argument, though, because the models deal in numbers, not text. Those numbers are converted to text for human consumption only, so of course it won't contain the raw text anywhere in the model.

                                    jmcs@social.jsantos.euJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                    jmcs@social.jsantos.euJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                    jmcs@social.jsantos.eu
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #119

                                    @jamie @Azuaron @fsinn exactly, if law looked only at the content in disk and didn't consider intent then things would become silly very fast. An encrypted copy of Disney's latest movie also doesn't contain the movie by itself, and that never stopped Disney lawyers.

                                    ptesarik@infosec.exchangeP 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • max@gruene.socialM max@gruene.social

                                      @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.

                                      christianschwaegerl@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      christianschwaegerl@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      christianschwaegerl@mastodon.social
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #120

                                      @max @fsinn @jamie That's not true. Media organisations and individual journalist make a share of their income from granting licenses for secondary use of their digital works, for copying them or for offering them in libraries. Copyright is one of the few bedrocks of income. It doesn‘t vanish through wishful thinking or ignoring it.

                                      max@gruene.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • fsinn@mas.toF fsinn@mas.to

                                        @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.

                                        christianschwaegerl@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                        christianschwaegerl@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                        christianschwaegerl@mastodon.social
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #121

                                        @fsinn @jamie Thanks! Obtaining copyright for LLM-generated text is one thing, but I've read an assessment from a German state ministry yesterday that according to national laws copyright infringement by LLMs are passed on to users and text they generate in Germany, in their interpretation. If that holds, consequences might be rather big.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        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.

                                          chrastecky@phpc.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          chrastecky@phpc.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          chrastecky@phpc.social
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #122

                                          @jamie Hopefully they won't. If you right now published your company's non-AI code, you can be sure copyright infringement won't the thing that kills you, that's just a cherry on top.

                                          So if you do it with a codebase that has undisclosed AI code, you're still ruining your life except they won't have their cherry on top. Not sure it's worth it but YMMV.

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


                                          • Login

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