Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If I asked Claude to do the same can I also just put MIT license on it with my name? https://github.com/black-forest-labs/flux2 uses Apache License apparently. I know it doesn't matter that much and as long as it's permissive and openly available people don't care it's just pedantics but still.


The reference code shows how to setup the inference pipeline. It does not implement 99% of what the C code does. That is, the inference kernels, the transformer and so forth.


Assuming this was done in a US jurisdiction it doesn't matter what license you put on it as it is public domain and it needs no license. The US copyright office has ruled that anything AI generated is not covered by copyright.


Correction: it has ruled that anything AI generated is not copyrightable. That's a very important little difference and it does not mean that the production of the AI is not covered by copyright, it may well be (though proving that is going to be hard in most cases).


I'm not sure I see the difference. The rule is that anything not produced by a human is not copyrightable and is in the public domain. If something is not copyrightable and in the public domain how can it be covered by copyright?


> I'm not sure I see the difference.

The difference is massive because the source material is covered by copyright. So even if the product can't be copyrighted there is a fair chance that you'll get your ass sued by whoever is able to trace back some critical part of that product to their own work of which yours is now a derived work.


I'm talking about original, greenfield projects that was entirely written by an AI agent. There is no source material here beyond the agent and prompting. Prompting, AFAIK, hasn't been considered sufficient to make it a human produced work.

Or are you getting at the idea that the works the AI was originally trained on could still be considered an original work the generated code was derived from? Like if the generate code happens to look like someones code in github, that they could sue? I'm not 100% on sources here but I thought this was already tested in court and ruled it wasn't infringement.


i would love if you took the time to instruct claude to re-implement inference in c/c++, and put an mit license on it, it would be huge, but only if it actually works


FWIW stable-diffusion.cpp[0] (which implements a lot more than just stable diffusion, despite the name) is already a MIT licensed C++ library.

[0] https://github.com/leejet/stable-diffusion.cpp/




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: