The binary should be considered "derived work". Only the original copyright owner has the exclusive right to create or authorize derivative works. Means you are not allowed to compile code unless you have the license to do so. Right?

▲

graemep 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, so is LLM generated code a derivative work of the prompts? Does it matter how detailed the prompts are? How much the code conforms to what is already written (e.g. writing tests)?

It looks like it will be decided on a case by case basis.

It will also differ between countries, so if you are distributing software internationally what will be a constraint on treating the code as not copyrightable.

	▲	galaxyLogic 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> is LLM generated code a derivative work of the prompts? Very good question I would think it is. You are just using a mechanical system to transform your prompt to something else, Right? But, a distiguishing factor may be that: 1. Output of the LLM for the same prompt can vary 2. So you don't really have "control" over what the AI produces 3. Therefore you should not get a copyright to the output of the LLM because you had very little to say about how that transformation (from prompt to code) was made.