@laryllan @tante important to note here:

the AI outputted code need not be copyrightable in order to *remove* the old license. The relevant fact for that would be to see if the rewrite was "clean" or not (which as stated above, it's of course not, so this is considered a derivative work, thus via LGPL still owned by original authors).

As for applying a new MIT license, yeah this is hairy. The AI prompters might be doing some original coding of their own beyond just copy-pasting, in which case they retain a minimal amount of copyright overall (but most of it is public domain). So like, yeah they can't really be putting MIT unless they're doing tangible work of their own on top of AI boilerplate.

Code licenses tend to be designed to recognize all contributions, even small ones, so there's probably some room for debate, depending on their workflow.

But again, not that that matters, cuz removing the LGPL wasn't legal in the first place, since this wasn't a clean, ground up implementation.

(FYI I haven't researched this case too much, I've just read some of the comments in the thread lol)