Post

@simonwillison.net reading through your clean room post, have you thoughts on the Ai output is not copyrightable, ergo it cannot be licensed either? SCOTUS refused to hear appeals a few days ago, so lower court ruling stands for now. This post explores, not a lawyer too tuananh.net/2026/03/05/r...

I think that affects images generated from a single prompt, I haven't seen anything that suggests it affects LLM generated code that's had any hint of human interaction with the coding process at all

Again, called out explicitly in the report: www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright... "No matter how many times a prompt is revised and resubmitted, the final output reflects the user’s acceptance of the AI system’s interpretation, rather than authorship of the expression it contains. "

Many of my prompts start with me feeding in the entirety of my existing code - hard to see how that decision relating to image generation applies to LLMs for code

Is this limited to "one-shot" workflows? What if, i.e., I correct some decisions while letting some of it rip? (I suspect the answer is "it depends, evidentiary hearings would be needed")

Also covered: "As the Kernochan Center observed, “selection among the offered options” produced by such a system cannot be considered copyrightable authorship, because the “selection of a single output is not itself a creative act." It's a very thorough analysis and pretty damning for AI IP.

To clarify "correct some decisions", I'm thinking of the workflow where it comes back with something, than I correct or direct it, then it goes back to work. More of the iterative, human-in-the-loop, versus the set-it-and-forget-it that seems for sure covered here.