Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

Post by what » Sat, Aug 08, 2026, 2:07 AM UTC

SR2Z wrote: post #174

ethin wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not necessarily true. While no court has explicitly come out and said that copyright does not apply to AI-generated works of authorship, the US copyright office has[0]: > Based on an analysis of copyright law and policy, informed by the many thoughtful comments in response to our NOI, the Office makes the following conclusions and recommendations: > • Questions of copyrightability and AI can be resolved pursu…

The copyright office does not determine the standards for copyright. They are an advisory and notary organization. Only Congress and the courts do. Copyright exists from the moment a work is created, and does not need to be registered with the copyright office. The law isn't that complicated; if a work was created with a human being with intent, it's probably eligible for copyright protections. As long as you can con…

Post by goldgarden » Sat, Aug 08, 2026, 2:08 AM UTC

ux266478 wrote: post #82

mbrumlow wrote: post #35

Policies like this will result in the death of the branded software. As we move forward it will be easier than ever to just maintain and keep your fork of software with the changes you want or need. No more approval, bureaucracy, or arguing. Just tell the AI agent want you want changed and you have it. This will be used for huge things too. Like maybe you want a specific fork of Java that only supports for each itera…

I think it's even more pervasive than that. Why bother forking software at all? At the point in which code generation is meaningfully trivialized, software becomes entirely disposable. Anything you want, have a model spin it up. You don't even need libraries, the model can just make everything in-situ, who cares? Why on earth would I ever want to use SQLite if I have access to a sufficiently advanced code generator w…

Post by japgolly » Sat, Aug 08, 2026, 2:15 AM UTC

ActorNightly wrote: post #138

mcdow wrote: post #48

y’all seem to be missing the fact that Java is a mature product. it has left the “move fast and break things” era of it’s development. code is a liability, and they likely have more to lose than gain by allowing AI contribution.

Oracle Java is also basically effectively in KTLO mode. The biggest use of Java currently is Android, and Google is on a path to migrate to Fuchsia eventually. The second biggest use is Apache Spark/Kafka, but with LLMs now, you can pretty much re implement all of that functionality in pure C. They just want a legal angle, since this is how they make most of their money.

Post by selimthegrim » Sat, Aug 08, 2026, 2:34 AM UTC

yndoendo wrote: post #255

shevy-java wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems to make Larry more harmless. A lawnmower does not think. Larry thinks, so it seems to white-wash Larry here. It's more like that movie with Stephen King where the cars and other machines turn actively evil. Hilarious movie too, not great but hilarious.

Don not fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a 1958 Plymouth Fury named Christine. You don't anthropomorphize your killer car, the killer car is just out for blood - you rebuild it and it kills your friends and family, the end. You don't think 'oh, Christine hates me' - Christine doesn't give a * about you, Christine can't hate you. Don't anth…

Post by fian » Sat, Aug 08, 2026, 2:44 AM UTC

throw1234567891 wrote: post #206

SR2Z wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, your claim is "LLM generated code is not copyrighted." His claim is "LLM generated code is eligible for copyright."

No, that’s not what they are saying. They’re saying that the code generated by a human with help from an LLM may potentially be. This is what I hope we are going to arrive at, eventually.