Morten LinderudApparently chardet got Claude to rewrite the entire codebase from LGPL to MIT?
https://github.com/chardet/chardet/releases/tag/7.0.0
That is one way to launder GPL code I guess?
scy (not @ EH23)@Foxboron lol right, because Claude certainly wasn't trained on GPL code
@scy
US court is leaning towards that LLM generated code is fundamentally not copyrightable.
This is a different problem to the moral issues I have with this.
@Foxboron But does "is not copyrightable" mean that "is not a license violation of its input data"? I highly doubt it.
@scy
A license violation usually implies that there is a copyright violation to begin with.
A license violation usually implies that there is a copyright violation to begin with.
@Foxboron Yeah but that's what I mean: Just because the end result is not copyrightable, does that automatically mean that it can't be a copyright violation?
Like, changing the format or medium of something is not a copyrightable work.
So, by that logic, if I take a copyrighted MP3 and convert it to AAC and publish that, my AAC is not copyrightable, but it's not a copyright violation to take it and publish it?
That's what I mean.
Zimmie@scy @Foxboron It is absolutely a violation for the company which built the model to build a model which emits license-restricted code without following the terms of the license. The model doesn’t commit the violation any more than a photocopier does, of course.
The emitted code cannot be copyrighted at all, but if it emitted the code in a way which meets the terms of the license, the code would be covered by the original license.