Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU • Hacker News Board

Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU

#221

Post by apatheticonion » Sat, Aug 22, 2026, 8:39 PM UTC

unified101 wrote: post #134

jdswain wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a lawyer, but I'd expect that decompilation creates a derived work which is still subject to the copyright of the original.

If you engineer a clean room process, it does not. Already proven with an open source project that went from GPL to MIT via clean room (chardet).

Exactly this. Using an LLM to study the decompiled output then another LLM to implement an emulator/engine/etc

That sounds similar to how LLMs have been trained on GPL code and yet output is not (yet) considered derivative work

Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU

#222

Post by _davide_ » Mon, Aug 24, 2026, 11:48 AM UTC

Ekaros wrote: post #145

_davide_ wrote: post #91

Under this interpretation models themselves do not have copyright protection either

Funnily I think copyright protection for LLM model is 15 years. As to me it just looks like very fancy database and that is the protection for those...

Not a layer but a bit nerdy on the law but specially on the copyright side. Copyright is a framework to protect creative work. One could easily argue that an LLM model is just weights automatically produced from data and there is no creative work involved. The counterpart would argue that the body of training is itself a curated body that is reflected in the model and that the pipeline training is a creative process required to obtain the final model, like some artist work; But it feels like a weak argument to me.

But then again, let's stop pretending law in US has any meaning other than what the billionaires or the dictator wants.

Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU

#223

Post by killix » Tue, Aug 25, 2026, 1:23 AM UTC

jongjong wrote: post #44

> When you put your name on an article that's written by ChatGPT or Claude, you're basically putting a provenance mark on it saying: I take responsibility for this. I haven't written it, but I'm putting my name on it. That doesn't give you copyright, but it does give you liability for the content If the AI is treated as an agent during inference, distinct from its user and not merely as a tool, then this should also…

[flagged]

Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU

#224

Post by voxic11 » Tue, Aug 25, 2026, 7:27 PM UTC

tossaway0 wrote: post #213

voxic11 wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In cinema it works the same as in software engineering. There is an exception to normal copyright law where works made in the course of employment are treated as if the author is the employer rather than the actual author of the work. Its known in copyright law as a "work for hire" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_hire > In the United States, United Kingdom, and several other jurisdictions, if a work is created…

So then a film project where no one is paid would need all operators to cede their copyright to the person spearheading the project, correct? If employment is an exception, I wonder what would happen if an animal that you owned pressed the shutter on a camera.

Not paying anyone would be a violation of minimum wage laws. Or it would mean they are truly equal partners in the project who have no "employer" they are working under. In which case it does seem most fair that they would all own the copyrights to their contributions absent some other agreement to assign copyright.

Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU

#225

Post by 0x20cowboy » Thu, Aug 27, 2026, 11:30 AM UTC

dgellow wrote: post #175

0x20cowboy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

Most of the people I see doing that ship nothing. They just seemingly loop for the sake of looping.

However, I just saw a product yesterday that was released and being built as you described. Interesting times.