You can copyright the instructions file, as long as you wrote it.
Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
171–180 of 225 posts
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#172There was some related discussions of US law recently[0].
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#173This matches historical precedent in other nations where copyright was not extended to a photographer when a primate took a photo of themselves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...
All this talk of animal rights, and then this! /s
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#174So 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.
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.
We’re soon going to return to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
Add a subtle bug or odd behavior to your code, see if someone else’s code repros it (presumably via LLM regurgitation), sue.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#175As software, creative works, science, etc become more and more contributed via AI does that mean all future works will not be copyrighted or patented? Under our current copyright culture and laws obviously not but that does open the question to how much does a human have to contribute and what evidence is required to show that a human contributed enough so that it can be copyrighted and patented. Some time in the fut…
"Content that is entirely generated by artificial intelligence is not protected by copyright." If that is faithful reading of the law, that makes sense. I know a number of people who use AI, but none of them (that are making anything actually useful) have the output "entirely generated" (aside from some POC tests that never see the light of day). I have a hard time believing anything of value, anything worth copyrigh…
The current trend (since months now) is to have everything done through agentic loops. Meaning humans are only here to provide the initial prompt and do a few back and forth during the implementation.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Content that is entirely generated [...] Take note of the qualifier entirely . If you're working with an agent steering it to produce the results you want, it would be an entirely different story.
a bit further down ... > Neither mere prompting nor the selection between several AI suggestions is sufficient as a human creative contribution. which reads like you actually have to contribute by modifying the output from the system, i.e. prompts/inputs to the system do not count as a human contribution.
If you modify the output, you don’t magically get copyright on the whole output, only the section you modified
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://blog.curiousquail.com/im-upset-again-about-a-co-crea... What about using torrents to acquire that content?
Torrents are legal? Seeding is often considered the actual point of infringement, aka sharing copyrighted material without the right licence. I should note I suppose that I don't agree with companies using artists or developers hard work for their own financial gain without compensation, whatever form that may take. The problem as usual is the availability of legal loopholes when you have a team of lawyers and near i…
It really depends the country, downloading a Hollywood movie via torrent is itself illegal in a lot of countries. The only exception I’m aware of is Switzerland
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#178So 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.
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.
We know for a fact that Bun port to Rust was done entirely by Claude! I’m wondering if that could be used against Anthropic in some ways (not that I want to, just curious what would be the angle)
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Torrents are legal? Seeding is often considered the actual point of infringement, aka sharing copyrighted material without the right licence. I should note I suppose that I don't agree with companies using artists or developers hard work for their own financial gain without compensation, whatever form that may take. The problem as usual is the availability of legal loopholes when you have a team of lawyers and near i…
It really depends the country, downloading a Hollywood movie via torrent is itself illegal in a lot of countries. The only exception I’m aware of is Switzerland
You're right I was thinking of civil vs criminal penalties.
Personal downloading is generally only a civil violation, requiring the rights holder to sue you for reparations.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#180Does this mean someone could develop a switch emulator using an AI and Nintendo couldn't win a lawsuit against them? Does it enable decompilation remasters of classic games? It feels like AI is a cleanroom laundromat
Im not sure it’s really a copyright issue here, and not patent or trademark related, or something else. Copyright is really only one aspect of IP laws and they all have their own legal nuances