It's up to them to prove that a) the original implementation was not part of whatever data set said AI used and b) that the engineers in question did not use the original as a basis.

▲

charcircuit 7 hours ago | parent [-]

It's up to the accuser to prove that they copied it and did not actually write it from scratch as they claimed.

▲

fzeroracer 7 hours ago | parent [-]

No, that's not how copyright laws work. Especially in a world where the starting point is the accused making something and marketing it as someone else's IP with a license change.

	▲	Ukv 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's still on the claimant to establish copying, which usually involves showing that the two works are substantially similar in protected elements. That the defendants had access to the original helps establish copying, but isn't on its own sufficient. Only after that would the burden be on the defendants, such as to give a defense that their usage is sufficiently transformative to qualify as fair use.