non-copyrightable

If AI code is non-copyrightable, does this not achieve the aims of copyleft by different means?

But this means code generated by snippet expanders or any sort of templates is non-copyrightable.

Google wrote code and used non-copyrightable part of Java, Alibaba did not (but they still didn't do anything wrong).

YUP, and it's not quite why I guessed but the situation is pretty similar: non-copyrightable content (legal opinions), successful use of copyright claims over the arrangement.

If that code was non-copyrightable (such as generated via an LLM), then they're fine doing it without your permission, no?

This is no less of a trademark than any other trademark that consists of non-copyrightable elements.

In a typical output that doesn't not line-for-line resemble a single training input, it is considered a new, but non-copyrightable work.

If the code was rewritten with an AI, then it becomes a non-copyrightable work?

But the end result is still a completely different expression of underlying non-copyrightable ideas.

I’ve mostly heard that images generated by AI are considered non-copyrightable (prompts are written by a human).

Second, there are a lot of non-copyrightable components to source code - if you can't copyright it - you certainly can't GPL it.

Yes, training is considered fair use, and output is non-copyrightable / public domain.

The gist is "what do copyleft licences aim to achieve as an end goal - and what would non-copyrightable code mean in that broader context?"

Famously, the output from monkey "artists" was found to be non-copyrightable even though a monkey's brain is much more similar to ours than an LLM.

I'm not sure if "plagiarism" is the right word or not, but given that the output of an AI seems to be considered non-copyrightable*, and given also that a lot of people are very upset about generative AI being immoral**, I think it's important to identify which contributions are from the tools whose use may cause problems.

Non-copyrightable API's is in turn is the reason we enjoy atleast some level of interoperability today, as API's and their corresponding functionality can be re-implemented across platforms despite all the 'vendor-lock in' companies like Microsoft have tried to enforce.