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. so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
scotusawslopmicroslop
72 Posts 44 Posters 67 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.
  • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

    @Viss that is EXACTLY the admission i was thinking of. also, the AWS “agentic” fiasco that deleted a whole server farm, or whatever it was? yah. should be interesting.

    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
    #27

    @blogdiva

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • elduvelle@neuromatch.socialE elduvelle@neuromatch.social

      @blogdiva that's silly, it's like saying something written by a typewriter is not copyright-able because it was made by a machine.. The "AI" program was made by a human in the first place, it's just slightly more sophisticated..

      drsaucy@sfba.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
      drsaucy@sfba.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
      drsaucy@sfba.social
      wrote last edited by
      #28

      @elduvelle @blogdiva Genuinely curious, are you always this silly or do you just play ridiculous as a Reply Guy?

      elduvelle@neuromatch.socialE 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • calbearo@convo.casaC calbearo@convo.casa

        @drahardja Even more of a threat to film and music execs and producers wanting to use AI for films, TV and music. This could devalue those threats to human content creators.

        bransonturner@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
        bransonturner@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
        bransonturner@mastodon.social
        wrote last edited by
        #29

        @calbearo @drahardja yeah, pretty excited to start remixing Aranofsky's slop Revolutionary War series!

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • leslieburns@esq.socialL leslieburns@esq.social

          @elduvelle
          Yeah... you're right: you are NOT a lawyer.

          I am and you don't know what you are talking about. Transformation has NOTHING to do with copyrightability. Nada. Nichevo. Rien.

          (@drahardja )

          eldersea@expressional.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
          eldersea@expressional.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
          eldersea@expressional.social
          wrote last edited by
          #30

          @LeslieBurns @elduvelle @drahardja

          LMAO damn.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
          • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

            so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

            #SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

            this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

            ❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
            https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

            flashmobofone@mstdn.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            flashmobofone@mstdn.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            flashmobofone@mstdn.social
            wrote last edited by
            #31

            @blogdiva Also could make it harder for Hollywood and TV production studios, who are probably thinking they'll go full AI at some point in the coming years.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • drsaucy@sfba.socialD drsaucy@sfba.social

              @elduvelle @blogdiva Genuinely curious, are you always this silly or do you just play ridiculous as a Reply Guy?

              elduvelle@neuromatch.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
              elduvelle@neuromatch.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
              elduvelle@neuromatch.social
              wrote last edited by
              #32

              @DrSaucy I'm not sure what your problem is, but are you sure you are answering to the correct post? Reply guy? What is ridiculous in my post?

              drsaucy@sfba.socialD 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

                so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

                #SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

                this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

                ❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
                https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

                ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
                ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
                ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai
                wrote last edited by
                #33

                @blogdiva

                The big tech companies have created the most inefficient and expensive public library known to man.

                They’ve read that LLMs will happily reproduce an entire work of an author just basically copy pasting the book.

                Should work wonders asking one of these videos services to completely replicate down to the pixel whatever film we want

                wyatt_h_knott@vermont.masto.hostW 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • drahardja@sfba.socialD drahardja@sfba.social

                  @blogdiva Does this mean all those AI-generated ads are not copyrightable?

                  Time to remix.

                  Link Preview Image
                  Coca-Cola causes controversy with AI-generated ad

                  Coca-Cola is facing backlash online over an artificial intelligence-made Christmas promotional video that users are calling “soulless” and “devoid of any actual creativity.”

                  favicon

                  NBC News (www.nbcnews.com)

                  freediverx@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                  freediverx@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                  freediverx@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #34

                  @drahardja @blogdiva
                  Copyrights are only to protect the Epstein class, silly.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • calbearo@convo.casaC calbearo@convo.casa

                    @drahardja Even more of a threat to film and music execs and producers wanting to use AI for films, TV and music. This could devalue those threats to human content creators.

                    ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
                    ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
                    ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai
                    wrote last edited by
                    #35

                    @calbearo @drahardja

                    If AI has been trained on copyrighted material from all these studios, it’s yo ho, yo ho Pirates life for us

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

                      so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

                      #SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

                      this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

                      ❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
                      https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

                      not2b@sfba.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                      not2b@sfba.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                      not2b@sfba.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #36

                      @blogdiva Those rulings would probably only apply to the LLM generated parts; any real software product would be a mix of human-designed and AI generated parts, so it would presumably still have copyright protection. Now it is possible that a software product that is entirely "vibe coded" isn't copyrightable in the US, but currently those products suck too badly to be worth stealing.

                      blogdiva@mastodon.socialB fluffykittycat@furry.engineerF tkissing@mastodon.socialT 3 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • elduvelle@neuromatch.socialE elduvelle@neuromatch.social

                        @jaystephens

                        Definitely, see my other answer here
                        https://neuromatch.social/@elduvelle/116161779140284723

                        In the end I'd say the question is "who should benefit from the copyright", not whether the LLM's output is copyrightable or not, because I don't see why it wouldn't be. Obviously it's not going to be easy to figure it out, but in theory all those who contributed to the output (including in the training set) should be considered as contributors. The LLM itself, like a typewriter, is not a contributor.

                        jaystephens@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        jaystephens@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        jaystephens@mastodon.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #37

                        @elduvelle
                        Yeah that would be a fair outcome.
                        It rather raises the question of to what extent the intended purpose of commercial LLMs as they actually exist is to obfuscate things precisely so that any outcome like that is unachievable.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • leslieburns@esq.socialL leslieburns@esq.social

                          @elduvelle
                          Yeah... you're right: you are NOT a lawyer.

                          I am and you don't know what you are talking about. Transformation has NOTHING to do with copyrightability. Nada. Nichevo. Rien.

                          (@drahardja )

                          sharlatan@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                          sharlatan@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                          sharlatan@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #38

                          @LeslieBurns @elduvelle @drahardja may you provide more details please 🙏?

                          leslieburns@esq.socialL 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

                            so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

                            #SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

                            this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

                            ❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
                            https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

                            G This user is from outside of this forum
                            G This user is from outside of this forum
                            grandote2012@social.vivaldi.net
                            wrote last edited by
                            #39

                            @blogdiva Good point, maybe we can #DeMicrosoft the world, by arguing that, we could, potentially, make MS Apps, Software and maybe even Windows #OpenSource.

                            I know, dreaming...

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

                              so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

                              #SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

                              this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

                              ❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
                              https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

                              S This user is from outside of this forum
                              S This user is from outside of this forum
                              spacelifeform@infosec.exchange
                              wrote last edited by
                              #40

                              @blogdiva

                              If an AI/LLM reverse engineers the Windows codebase, and publishes the results, is this a Copyright violation?

                              What if Copilot does this? Is it a contract violation?

                              Did Copilot sign a NDA?

                              #CopyRight #AI #Insanity

                              marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • leslieburns@esq.socialL leslieburns@esq.social

                                @elduvelle
                                Yeah... you're right: you are NOT a lawyer.

                                I am and you don't know what you are talking about. Transformation has NOTHING to do with copyrightability. Nada. Nichevo. Rien.

                                (@drahardja )

                                lilleffie@mstdn.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                lilleffie@mstdn.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                lilleffie@mstdn.social
                                wrote last edited by
                                #41

                                @LeslieBurns @elduvelle @drahardja
                                Thank you showing up to the party.
                                LOVE ME SOME…..
                                “well, actually, let me explain it you.”

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

                                  so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

                                  #SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

                                  this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

                                  ❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
                                  https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

                                  gregstolze@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                                  gregstolze@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                                  gregstolze@mastodon.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #42

                                  @blogdiva Even the worst SCOTUS of my lifetime says, "If you can't be arsed to make it, I can't be bothered to copyright it."

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

                                    BTW

                                    as Google attempts to turn #Android phones proprietary, what with the way techbros have conspired to use embeddables as backdoors; should be insteresting to do a full auditing of the hardware and software used in Android phones specifically manufactured for the USA market.

                                    basically, techbros have hidden behide “trade secrets” and "security" to take control away from us.

                                    i would assume auditing for what’s built with automata should render that proprietary part null.

                                    sunguramy@flipping.rocksS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    sunguramy@flipping.rocksS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    sunguramy@flipping.rocks
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #43

                                    @blogdiva please forgive me, it's been a day, am I reading this correctly that essentially, anything AI/LLM made is not copyrightable and thus we can do whatever the heck we want with it and companies can't do shit about it? And since it has zero value (because it cannot be copyrighted)...this will lead (hopefully) to it's collapse. Thus...all this is good news...right? Or am I missing something? Please let this be good news...

                                    blogdiva@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • elduvelle@neuromatch.socialE elduvelle@neuromatch.social

                                      @DrSaucy I'm not sure what your problem is, but are you sure you are answering to the correct post? Reply guy? What is ridiculous in my post?

                                      drsaucy@sfba.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                                      drsaucy@sfba.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                                      drsaucy@sfba.social
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #44

                                      @elduvelle I've no problem & I'm quite certain my reply was to your sophomoric response to the OP.

                                      elduvelle@neuromatch.socialE 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • blogdiva@mastodon.socialB blogdiva@mastodon.social

                                        so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

                                        #SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

                                        this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

                                        ❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
                                        https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

                                        affekt@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        affekt@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        affekt@hachyderm.io
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #45

                                        @blogdiva "Thaler asked the Supreme Court to review the ruling in October 2025, arguing it “created a chilling effect on anyone else considering using AI creatively.”"

                                        -good

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • leslieburns@esq.socialL leslieburns@esq.social

                                          @elduvelle
                                          Yeah... you're right: you are NOT a lawyer.

                                          I am and you don't know what you are talking about. Transformation has NOTHING to do with copyrightability. Nada. Nichevo. Rien.

                                          (@drahardja )

                                          drahardja@sfba.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          drahardja@sfba.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          drahardja@sfba.social
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #46

                                          @LeslieBurns @elduvelle I’d love to learn more!

                                          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