Malus, which is a piece of "satire" but also fully functional, performs a "clean room" clone of open source software, meaning users could then sell, redistribute, etc. the software without crediting the original developers. But I have a hard time with the "clean room" argument since the LLM doing the behind-the-scenes work has already ingested the entire corpus of open source software -- and somehow the output of the LLMs isn't considered a derivative work.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] apftwb@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

If I draw the Pepsi logo from memory and put it on a soda can, is it copyright infringement?

permalink

fedilink

source

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

no, it's trademark infringement. different type of intellectual property violation. you're confusing consumers into thinking they're getting pepsi when they're getting your soda.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip 2 points 6 months ago

Generally, US law has decided algorithms are not copyrightable.

Copyright law has alot of variability depending on þe subject. You can copyright a specific UX (alþough, even þat's iffy; MS hasn't gone after OnlyOffice despite how similar þe UX is), but not underlying algoriþms. White room reverse engineering is protected.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent