TraceFeb 14
Nick Lockwood

People pontificating about whether codebases containing LLM-generated code are subject to IP protection all seem to be forgetting the key point that the law always sides with capital

When big media decided that pirating an mp3 file should be a criminal (not civil) offence, the law sided with them

When big tech decided that pirating every piece of media on the internet for AI training was fair use, the law sided with them

Feb 13 at 8:34amIceCubesApp
Show threadNick LockwoodFeb 13

Sure there will be some border skirmishes where IP owner interests clash, but in the end the law will settle on whatever makes the people who pay the lawmakers happy

Instead of trying to read legal precedents like tea leaves, just ask yourself who benefits?

Does big tech benefit from the commons being able to legally appropriate their IP because they used AI in its creation?

Obviously not

So that obviously won't happen

Show threadNick LockwoodFeb 13

The handwringing about the implications for open source codebases is also especially hilarious

I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, but the answer to the question "does this mean people can now take my MIT-licensed code without attribution if I used a coding assistant?" is that they were already doing that, long before LLMs

If you're lucky, that will continue to be the case. If you're unlucky, then everyone will just vibe code their own solutions and your project will die in obscurity

Show threadFrank ReiffFeb 13
@nicklockwood Yeah.. but at least you’ll know that somewhere in the code slop your MIT licensed code will have contributed a few weights in that GPU you can no longer afford 😜
Show threadMatthew FlintFeb 13
@nicklockwood
I wonder if this might scare the big companies though… the kinds of places whose legal teams are terrified of the GPL?
Show threadNick LockwoodFeb 13
@matthew Spotify just announced that their developers haven't written a line of code in months. How big of a company are we taking about?
Show threadMatthew FlintFeb 13
@nicklockwood
Oof, that’s a sobering thought.
Show threadastolkFeb 18
@nicklockwood and as for liability it is probably the other way around, or actually the same. There will probably be no liability for issues caused by errors made by AI.
Show threadMarcin KrzyzanowskiFeb 13
@nicklockwood as a human. I hate it.
Show threadNick LockwoodFeb 13
@krzyzanowskim if I were a human, I would simply become a rich human, then all my problems would be solved
Show threadJochen ZilskeFeb 13
@nicklockwood @krzyzanowskim “simply” 🙂
Show threadobrhoffFeb 13

@nicklockwood It reminds me a little bit when people thought that music labels would protect artists since they fought in the past for copyright protection.

But now these labels are negotiating licensing fees to train on their catalogue. They just go where the money is and their catalogue is just an asset.

Show threadNick LockwoodFeb 13
@obrhoff 💯. Why make war with big tech when they can get a cut of the profits instead
Show threadJan Lehnardt Feb 13
@nicklockwood Looking forward to the next version of OpenWindows
Show threadBrandonFeb 13
@nicklockwood nailed it
Show threadKlaus FrankFeb 13

@nicklockwood

Thankfully the later one is not yet over as there are also a lot of capital interests opposing this interpretation. Lawsuits are still ongoing...

Show threadAshley BlewerFeb 14
@nicklockwood just had to do a copyright lecture for a class I teach last week (a/v preservation) and it's hard for me to convey importance of precedent while also knowing capital is the only thing that matterssssss!!!
Show threadAshley BlewerFeb 14
@nicklockwood just ended up spending a long time talking about Sony and Universal beefing over VTRs
Show threadWade RobertsFeb 14
@nicklockwood one of the greatest trick capitalists ever pulled off was convincing creative individuals that IP laws exist to serve their interests.
Show threadYoraFeb 16
@nicklockwood That's not law. That's tyranny.