| ▲ | porphyra a day ago | |
How come all the open source projects are fretting over the copyright status of LLM code but big companies are just vibe coding slop all day for their internal closed source projects without a care in the world? | ||
| ▲ | dehugger a day ago | parent | next [-] | |
Risk exposure of "internal closed source" vs "open source". No one (external) cares nor can inspect a companies pile of internal utilities and code. As long as the code works than there's no problems. Everyone and their cat can look at open source projects, which can and will result in being called out publicly. This can also have legal ramifications on the project itself. | ||
| ▲ | pull_my_finger a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
It's almost like the big companies are playing by a totally different set of rules. How else could Sam, Zuck and co, just blatantly rip pirated, copyrighted, copylefted material and just call whatever repercussions they do (or don't) receive the "cost of doing business". I'm not "anti-AI", I think it's incredible what can be done, but HOW it was produced, and how it's being used is wrong on so many levels. Spotify is running ads for a design "thing", that's basically a generative AI logo creator. Isn't that one of the few instances that's already been clearly put into law - that you can't copyright AI generated stuff? How can you create a business that's selling uncopyrightable logos (which definitely would need/want to be copyrighted/trademarked)? It's the Wild, Wild West out here. | ||
| ▲ | scotty79 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Because open source community is idealistic and corporations are pragmatic. | ||