logoalt Hacker News

socalgal2today at 1:32 AM5 repliesview on HN

So this means you can not use AI for the majority of open source projects since GPL, MIT, BSD, etc are all copyright declarations and they'd be being made for code which you can not copyright.


Replies

porneltoday at 1:44 AM

You can't enforce those licenses against AI-generated parts, because enforcement relies on the recipient having no other way to avoid copyright infringement.

However, there's no issue with including non-copyrightable code in otherwise copyrighted projects. There's already plenty of non-copyrightable code like auto-generated boilerplate.

show 1 reply
randyrandtoday at 1:44 AM

No it would mean the license does not apply to the parts of code written by AI.

show 2 replies
voxelghosttoday at 2:35 AM

wasnt there a case a while back, where GPL or LGPL code made its way into MIT licensed software via LLM? And they were forced to remove the copyleft code. I dont remember the details though.

show 1 reply
Joel_Mckaytoday at 2:42 AM

Indeed, but people will continue to think vector search compaction similarity absolves folks of Trademark and Copyright liability.

As the dark specter of Disney Mickey Mouse looms over every LLM model involved in isomorphic and character plagiarism. Yes, even motion capture is considered a performance act in the guilds, so video reskinning an unlicensed performance act people make is also a liability.

It would sure save a lot of money if you don't get caught, so people are gonna try it for sure. =3

unethical_bantoday at 2:15 AM

It will be interesting if or when someone tries to enforce that perspective. Good luck proving an online contributor used AI on a merge request.

Perhaps we'll have new iterations of FOSS licenses to adjust to legal declarations.

show 3 replies