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.
@mttaggart Not a lawyer but in my career I’ve often focused on these questions.
No copyright = no OSI license.
In the US, the Perlmutter case decided works generated by a simple prompt (“an image of a landscape”) are not copyrightable.
however! many things are copyrightable when mixed with enough human selection and creativity. A database of streets, a selective anthology of Shakespeare, all can be copyrighted. An arrangement of AI-generated non-copyrightable works might be copyrightable.
@mttaggart personally i don’t believe that code substantially generated by AI is something one can ethically retain a monopoly over. but I am also a radical about most computer code produced by humans too.
And the law, for that matter; copyright is particularly an instrument of power rather than justice. There’s so much wiggle room here, I expect the US courts to come around to whatever view benefits corporate America the most.
Taggart
Neil Kandalgaonkar