Login
You're viewing the scottodon.com public feed.
  • Nov 8, 2026, 7:51 AM

    Look, we all already know that any code that an LLM generates is plagiarized, basically by definition. And if that plagiarized code was copied from a source with anything other than a CC0 or Public Domain license, your copy has a distinctly nonzero chance of violating some sort of license requirement; perhaps some copyright, attribution, or re-licensing clause.

    I think it’s only a short matter of time until someone develops a code-scanning tool to look for potential license violations in popular FOSS projects found in commits created by LLMs. They would then use those commits to shake down projects for money, demand licensing fees, or demand IP ownership of certain features, based on those commits.

    If you’re a closed-source software behemoth, maybe you’ll never deal with this, because nobody can directly inspect your code for violations. And besides, it’d take too much money to sue you. But if you’re a FOSS project with any grant or foundation money behind you? You’d look like a pretty juicy target.

    #ai

    💬 4🔄 20⭐ 19

Replies

  • Nov 8, 2026, 8:01 AM

    I’ve never felt comfortable using LLMs to generate code for anything that gets released to the public. Not just for provenance and licensing reasons (although those alone should give you pause), but also for copyrightability reasons. AI art is already deemed un-copyrightable in the US (theverge.com/policy/887678/sup)—not that that stops even large companies from generating AI slop, which boggles my mind—so it seems to me that we are a small step away from finding out that no code generated by LLMs can be copyrighted at all.

    The way I (not a lawyer) see it, using LLMs in my (at least published) software projects puts me in a risky legal situation. I simply don’t do it.

    #ai

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 6
  • Nov 8, 2026, 8:10 AM

    And before you dismiss my scenario as made-up nonsense, remember that Patent Trolls exist. All these companies do is find/buy/license patents, and look for products that violate those patents. They do this by painstakingly reading patents and finding ways that seemingly random products could be violating those patents.

    Well, guess what we just spent two trillion dollars on that can read a huge bunch of source materials to find potential matches? That’s right: Spicy Autocomplete. Even with low hit rates, these stochastic pattern-matchers will yield enough potential matches to make a shake-down business possible. It doesn’t matter if you actually copied the code; it only has to be *plausible* that you *might* have copied the code—and using LLMs means it is definitely plausible, because the original source is likely somewhere in the training set of whatever model you used.

    I think it’s not going to take much longer until this happens.

    #ai

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 4
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 2
  • Nov 8, 2026, 8:02 AM

    @photex I don’t know if there is A Plan for anything. I think the money behind AI is just as stupid and ham-fisted as anyone. They’re just looking looking for a way to keep the house of cards standing while building it taller and taller.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 3
  • Nov 8, 2026, 8:47 AM

    @drahardja @photex The added bonus is that these scanners won't be 100% correct. So there are a far from non-zero chance your project that has never touched LLM's to create anything still get hit by litigation and has to close down. Great isn't it?

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 1
  • Nov 8, 2026, 8:56 AM

    @eq @photex Sure. But it sure is a lot easier to argue that you wrote that commit by yourself and put the burden of proof on the troll to show that you plagiarized, than if you used the Plagiarism Robot to extrude your code.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Nov 8, 2026, 12:23 PM

    @drahardja And lest anyone think a behemoth can shake off these legal challenges no problem, Commodore was sued by a patent troll claiming to have invented the mouse cursor, and Commodore lost. Banned from selling their machines in the US, they were bankrupt within a year.

    All of this has happened before, all of this can happen again.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Nov 8, 2026, 9:07 AM

    @drahardja rather, i think the opposite is going to happen. Making money from software will cease to exist and everybodoy will just give up trying to enforce software patents.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 1
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0