If you had any doubt that the rise of LLM tools is a threat to F/OSS, even beyond the fact that its trained on it without permission, and is now frequently used to replace it (why import a battle-tested library when you can have an "agent" half-ass it?), people are now using LLMs to create derivative rewrites of open source projects to give them cover for bullshit relicensing attempts.
@baldur with the recent supreme court ruling on works created by llms being unable to be copyrighted...
#Copyright is for humans.
I ain't a lawyer. But that's an obvious problem for #vibecoding and #agenticai works.
An odd way to come at it for some, but there it is. From #SCOTUS.
https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright
First, it wasn't a supreme court ruling. They refused to get involved to make a ruling.
But to the point, copyright is for society, not for humans.
Copyright is a convenience of law created by legislators because it's seen as a social good to sort out ownership and grant privileges that encourage compositions to be released to the world.
That's why it's limited. If it was for humans it would be tied to humans, but it's not. It's simply a system based on whatever lawmakers see best.
Currently, lawmakers are requiring a human to be involved, but there's no reason they couldn't change that should it be seen as better for society.
@volkris @baldur Absolutely right.
But there is a grey area of recognition, therefore authorship, and therefore licensing.
I just wrote something up on that.