Citation needed

I though a while if i should answer to it. And this is so wrong, and dangerous, that i decided to do.

First: Such licensing questions are part of my day to day Job. I will explain it to you like i explain it to first semester students:

A LICENSE defines the terms under which a copyrighted work can be used, distributed and so on. It does not matter what the work is. A few relevant examples:

• Beats: in the music industry there is a market for beats. If you take a 10 second beat and in-cooperate it in your own music without having a license for it, you are in violation of copyright law.
• Paintings: You can not have a copyright on the concept of using paint to draw pictures on a piece of linen, you can not have a copyright on the concept of a specific object drawn on linen. You can have copyright on YOUR version of it. If somebody else takes your work, and only modifies it slightly (or for example, include it into a book, that is a copyright-able piece of work), without having a license for it... copyright violation

So, this brings us back to our topic:

There is no difference between sourcecode, music, paintings or writings for the purpose of licensing.

So, as courts established, AI CAN NOT BE CREATIVE and ALWAYS based on other works. Therefore any AI generated Work is in itself are not protected by copyright.

So, EVERY piece of code that is AI generated is free to go for any purpose, it does not fucking matter if there is a GPL 3.0 header in the file. AI Generated == Public domain.

But: Projects use viral copyleft licenses for a reason. A company could just take the AI generated code, implement it, and if somebody has a problem with it an just shrug "It's AI generated, it's public domain".