[marcus_holmes]

There's already been a case where an artist generated art using an LLM, and could not claim copyright on it [0]. Though the guy was torpedoing his own case by claiming the machine created the entire thing. The courts are supporting copyright claims when using an LLM as a tool to support human effort.

All software licensing depends on copyright. If no-one owns the copyright than it can't be licensed; it's in the public domain immediately and irrevocably.

Of course, if you rip off someone else's work, and they DMCA you, then you might need to prove that they generated the entire thing using an LLM with zero human input. Though there's plenty of folks posting blog posts claiming that that's their process, so it might not be that hard.

Patents are different. For a start they cost money and effort to get. And there are lots of rules around how they're applied and how you can defend them. Very different from copyright.

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/19/ai-art-cannot-be-copyrighted...