Fingers crossed Gnome follows suit! :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 5 days ago (5 children)

i think the copyright question is still unanswered: it could turn out that any LLM-generated code is a copyright violation by definition unless trained exclusively on a clean, legitimately-obtained dataset (which few of the major models are).

I think this argument is BS, there are several remix/sample based albums that count as derived works and AFAIK, no one is getting paid.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 days ago (2 children)

    Not exactly the same, and the music industry has had plenty of lawsuits going both ways on that kind of thing establishing a status quo for remixes and samples in music

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    Note that the remix/sample example hasn't always worked out as you state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Sweet_Symphony#Credits_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sweet_Lord#Copyright_infringement_suit

    In many cases, "AFAIK" in your case you may have no idea that in fact, the copyright holder is being paid. Or the copyright holder is one and the same, with rights sometimes assigned to someone other than the musicians involved.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment