so 3 courts + US Copyright Office say you cannot copyright nor patent anything made primarily with LLMs because automata aren't human.

#SCOTUS won't review these rules because copyright is meant to protect human creations, not software or automata.

this may mean #AWSlop #Microslop are “de-copyrighting” & “de-patenting” their own proprietary software as they let automata “code” 🧐

❝ AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule
https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule

The US Supreme Court has declined to hear a case over whether AI-generated art can be copyrighted.

The Verge
@blogdiva Those rulings would probably only apply to the LLM generated parts; any real software product would be a mix of human-designed and AI generated parts, so it would presumably still have copyright protection. Now it is possible that a software product that is entirely "vibe coded" isn't copyrightable in the US, but currently those products suck too badly to be worth stealing.

❝ any real software product would be a mix of human-designed and AI generated parts, so it would presumably still have copyright protection ❞

no, not necessarily.

IANAL but my impression is that they're extrapolating from measures used for determining plagiarism cases; along with case law involving FLOSS, the most famous the decades of Unix vs Linux battles.

again, this isn't my bread and butter but the techbros involved should know better. the proprietary claimants famously lost.

@not2b