logoalt Hacker News

Joel_Mckayyesterday at 4:10 AM2 repliesview on HN

US legal consensus has set the precedent that "AI" output can't be copyrighted. Thus, technically no one can really own or re-license prompt output.

Re-licensing public domain uncopyrightable work as GPL/LGPL is almost certainly a copyright violation, and no different than people violating GPL/LGPL in commercial works.

Linus is 100% wrong on this choice, and has introduced a serious liability into the foundation upstream code. =3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder%27s_syndrome

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6WHBO_Qc-Q


Replies

noosphryesterday at 4:46 AM

>Re-licensing public domain work as GPL/LGPL is almost certainly a copyright violation

Remember kids never get your legal advice from hn comments.

show 1 reply
kamyesterday at 4:32 AM

> Being in the public domain is not a license; rather, it means the material is not copyrighted and no license is needed. Practically speaking, though, if a work is in the public domain, it might as well have an all-permissive non-copyleft free software license. Public domain material is compatible with the GNU GPL.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#PublicDomain

show 1 reply