• REDACTED@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Last I checked, AI creations cannot be copyrighted if human work was not involved (no human - no copyrights). This means that if you had to do something by yourself, even compiling, then there was human. While for AI generated images it’s quite clear you will not own it, but software tends to be more advanced, ChatGPT doesn’t just send you an exe file, you have to put it together by yourself.

    • RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Again this is the difference between authorship and ownership. While I’m no lawyer, to my understanding you must demonstrate that what you did was genuinely transformative to claim authorship.

      You use compiling the code an LLM gives you as an example of this. Does a person running gentoo have the ability to claim authorship of all the software on their machine because they compiled it?

      I think the only thing you can certainly claim authorship over is the prompt(s) that were used to generate the output.

      Another good example of this is compilers. How often do you see people claim authorship of the assembly generated as an intermediary step of the gcc?