In the Monkey Selfie case - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput... - courts decided that copyright requires a human author and a human merely setting the conditions for a copyrighted work to appear is not enough.

This reasonably means AI contributions where a human has guided the AI are not subject to copyright, and thus can't be supported by a project's license.

That's quite a stretch, and untested in court.

At least a monkey is an unambiguous autonomous entity. A LLM is a - heck of a complicated - piece of software, and could very well be ruled a tool like any other