Taggart16h ago

I have what may be a very ignorant question: if model-generated code may not be copyrighted due to a requirement of human authorship (current US Copyright Office policy), does it therefore follow that model-generated code may not be licensed under any terms whatsoever? Meaning anything from MIT to GPLv3?

I recognize no answers here would constitute legal advice, but I would love to hear from legal experts on this.

Show threadMichael Terry15h ago
@mttaggart if you modify the code, you own copyright to your modifications and can license the combined package of generated code and your code.

“[H]uman authors should be able to claim copyright if they
select, coordinate, and arrange AI-generated material in a creative way. This would provide
protection for the output as a whole (although not the AI-generated material alone).”

From pdf page 32 of part 2 of this US report on copyright and AI: https://www.copyright.gov/policy/artificial-intelligence/
Artificial Intelligence Study | U.S. Copyright Office

Artificial Intelligence Study

Show threadGlyph15h ago
@mikix @mttaggart thanks so much for the citation! this has been my supposition but it's good to have something official-ish to point at.
Show threadTaggart15h ago
@glyph @mikix Important to note that this document comprises mostly comments on policy, not policy itself. But the established norm of human rearrangement would stand.
Show threadGlyph15h ago
@mttaggart @mikix indeed. on policy *itself* I think we are still kind of in the dark. but copyright law in general is far more of a mess than most engineers believe anyway
Show threadJames Hubbard

@glyph @mttaggart @mikix There was this recent case where the human wasn't able to get copyright on AI generated artwork. We won't know until something actually goes before the Supreme Court.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-declines-hear-dispute-over-copyrights-ai-generated-material-2026-03-02/

7:09pmWeb
Show threadGlyph14h ago
@jameshubbard @mttaggart @mikix refusing to grant cert *is* a supreme court decision, though
Show threadJames Hubbard13h ago
@glyph @mttaggart @mikix yes but in this case it was more of a piece of art not code. If SCOTUS refuses to hear a case about code that goes similarly, we'll have an answer at least temporarily.