LLM Code and FOSS licenses are in conflict.

https://lemmy.world/post/44571475

LLM Code and FOSS licenses are in conflict. - Lemmy.World

Lemmy

Some highlights from this talk: github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-docs/issues/413#issueco… Quote: “Obvious, this is copyright infringement.”
Consider having a stance on LLM code contributions, like perhaps a ban · Issue #413 · LemmyNet/lemmy-docs

Requirements Is this a feature request? For questions or discussions use https://lemmy.ml/c/lemmy_support or the matrix chat. Did you check to see if this issue already exists? Is this only a featu...

GitHub

This was linked in the discussion there, and I think I’m a fan: sciactive.com/human-contribution-policy/

I’m definitely considering adding something like this to my projects.

Human Contribution Policy – SciActive Inc

Fascinating talk.

According to the U.S. copyright office and Library of Congress, copyrighted work require a ‘human’ element: www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922

If art generated by AI can not be copyrighted, it may well extend to AI-generated code. If so, the implications could be pretty far-reaching.

The one, practical use-case of AI that has found ‘product market fit’ so far has been using AI for coding. Companies are encouraging it. Developers (including experienced ones) are starting to use more lf it. But if it turns out none of the generated output can be copyrighted, then you lose all the commercial users who are the revenue sources for all these tools and companies.

Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law

To be fair, this doesn’t mean you can’t use AI as a tool. An artist or a software developer can generate things with AI and orchestrate the pieces to become a new whole. That whole could still be copyrighted.
In that case the “orchestrate the pieces” part is copyrightable if it reaches a minimum threshold of creativity but the pieces themselves are still not copyrightable because a human still didn’t make them??

Probably not. The Copyright Office maintains that merely promoting the AI, even promoting it further to alter the output, is not enough creative control to grant copyrights to its output. I’ve put the most relevant quotes here:

sciactive.com/human-contribution-policy/#More-Inf…

Human Contribution Policy – SciActive Inc

I’ve written and started using this policy:

sciactive.com/human-contribution-policy/

Feel free to use it as is or adapt it as needed in your projects, or propose it to other open source projects. It’s got clear definitions of what is not allowed, so it should help eliminate any confusion.

Human Contribution Policy – SciActive Inc