| ▲ | stronglikedan 3 hours ago |
| There are no novel UIs, so copying UIs is okay, and necessary. As for source code, I'm a stickler for the license. The modern set of licenses cover any scenario I can think of, relatively fairly. AI is merely a tool, so the craftsman still owns the output. If the output violates a license, then the craftsman should be held to account. |
|
| ▲ | pryelluw 3 hours ago | parent [-] |
| I’ve seen companies get sued and lose in court for copying UIs. So no, legally speaking, copying a UI is not something that companies ignore. |
| |
| ▲ | kube-system 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The look and feel of an interface could be covered under a design patent, which would be a different question than copyright, and a much higher bar to enforce (particularly, protection is far from automatic). | | |
| ▲ | pryelluw 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | You’re talking about enforcement which is a fair point of view, but I’m taking about likelihood of getting sued and having to settle in order to avoid the risk of losing a case in court. Which is the more common case for situations where one company alleges the other stole their IP. |
| |
| ▲ | gpm 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Can you point to cases so I can google them? | | |
|
