5 ms·

Ironic. Even more so since it seems like in general LLM output doesn't seem to be proteced by copyright in the first place. And since Claude code is entirely wr

by emaro 6mo ago

Ironic. Even more so since it seems like in general LLM output doesn't seem to be proteced by copyright in the first place. And since Claude code is entirely written by Claude code, it shouldn't be proteced as well.

ArchieScrivener 6mo ago
FuckinAright
Hamuko 6mo ago
I really hope that someone disputes their DMCA claim based on that. I imagine no one will, since they'll probably be sued by Anthropic, but it would be really funny.
khalic 6mo ago
What's this armchair lawyer interpretation I'm hearing these last weeks, "LLM output doesn't seem protected by copyright"? It's extremely clear, from jurisprudence, that the level of human intervention in the process is what determines if it's copyrightable. This blanket statement is sensationalist, to say the least.
0x3f 6mo ago
There's no way it was entirely written by Claude Code. But even if it were, collections and databases can be protected even if their individual elements are not.
lifthrasiir 6mo ago
A common misunderstanding AFAIK. It is true that Claude, not being a person, can't be assigned a copyright by itself, but a person that interacts with Claude generally can. The famous monkey selfie case [1] was different mainly because the human "photographer" had absolutely no role in the creation of work. Most LLM uses don't fall into such ambiguity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...
- mhitza 6mo ago
  I've heard and read it from various sources already that output isn't copyrightable, and hinted as such recently in a comment. Now I've went to look up some sources. > Copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material, or material where there is insufficient human control over the expressive elements. > Whether human contributions to AI-generated outputs are sufficient to constitute authorship must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. PDF https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intell...

by emaro 6mo ago

ArchieScrivener 6mo ago

FuckinAright

Hamuko 6mo ago

I really hope that someone disputes their DMCA claim based on that. I imagine no one will, since they'll probably be sued by Anthropic, but it would be really funny.

khalic 6mo ago

What's this armchair lawyer interpretation I'm hearing these last weeks, "LLM output doesn't seem protected by copyright"? It's extremely clear, from jurisprudence, that the level of human intervention in the process is what determines if it's copyrightable. This blanket statement is sensationalist, to say the least.

0x3f 6mo ago

There's no way it was entirely written by Claude Code. But even if it were, collections and databases can be protected even if their individual elements are not.

lifthrasiir 6mo ago

A common misunderstanding AFAIK. It is true that Claude, not being a person, can't be assigned a copyright by itself, but a person that interacts with Claude generally can. The famous monkey selfie case [1] was different mainly because the human "photographer" had absolutely no role in the creation of work. Most LLM uses don't fall into such ambiguity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...

mhitza 6mo ago
I've heard and read it from various sources already that output isn't copyrightable, and hinted as such recently in a comment. Now I've went to look up some sources. > Copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material, or material where there is insufficient human control over the expressive elements. > Whether human contributions to AI-generated outputs are sufficient to constitute authorship must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. PDF https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intell...