441–450 of 570 posts
So by this logic my auto complete function before Ai also wrote 50% of my code and is not made by me, because I didn't type it. What should matter is intent, the human that gives the orders.
Well, have you actually read the license for the auto complete function? Example, https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items/VisualStudioExptT...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Software written by AIs are also not expressions of human creativity I mean I'm not the biggest fan of AI on the planet by any means (which I think my post history would prove, lol), but isn't prompt design and steering the AI "human creativity"? In one of my AI-assisted projects I spent like a week in unending threads of posts trying to make the AI do stuff the way I wanted, testing the output, finding a bazillion…
I wonder when my manager "prompts" me "I want the feature X and I want it fast", is his prompt a human creativity?
I think from this view it makes sense that an LLM is a tool, and the operator of that tool (or their employer) can own the output.
The tricky part is when you squint and view an LLM with training input and prompted output as a machine that launders copyrighted input into customized output that is now copyrighted by a new owner.
A machine that vacuums up film reels and splices them according to a set of instructions by the user to create a compilation of recent animated Disney movies with the Shrek soundtrack superimposed would probably not pass legal challenges if the user of the tool attempted to claim full copyright on the output.
Who own's the code? Who owns a potato? If the code is the produce of the LLM and that costs tokens, the owner of the code is the one who paid for the tokens. Money, time or attention, someone pays for the tokens, owns the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, have you actually read the license for the auto complete function? Example, https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items/VisualStudioExptT...
I just did. Nothing in here says who owns the resulting text. Did I miss something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's legal and perfectly reasonable for a human being to combine organic fuels with oxygen from the air to create energy and CO2. Any law restricting that would be the worst form of tyranny. It would not be reasonable to allow machines to do that at unlimited scale without restrictions. (Hopefully the fossil fuels industry won't draw inspiration from the legal arguments made by AI companies...)
> It's legal and perfectly reasonable for a human being to combine organic fuels with oxygen from the air to create energy and CO2. Is there any line past which it becomes unreasonable? > It would not be reasonable to allow machines to do that at unlimited scale without restrictions. If the machines were a replacement for a damaged respiratory system in a human would it reasonable? What about if the machine were bein…
That's exactly the question we should be asking about AI and fair use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A more logical explanation would be that there are different opinions and those who complain are usually louder.
Yes, that's my point. They are different and contradictory opinions, which show hypocrisy.
it's well known that recipes cannot be copyrighted. But recipes still are protected intellectual property by trade secret law if they are treated as a secret by the holder of the recipe. Claude code itself is a trade secret, and it is not open source, so its own copyrightability is moot till you get your hands on a copy of it with clean hands. Recipes cannot be copyrighted because they are not expressions of human cr…
In this case Anthropic published the Claude Code source map file on npm themselves. https://venturebeat.com/technology/claude-codes-source-code-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just did. Nothing in here says who owns the resulting text. Did I miss something?
> If you hover over a line of code in your application, coding assistance services will display code strings of supported function calls available through the coding assistance service that are also present in your current code file. Coding assistive services will retrieve snippets from publicly available open source code showing how others are using those same functions. 3. THIRD PARTY COMPONENTS. The software may i…