Or should I say, In the case of AI, "my" code :)

If I use a fancy brush in Photoshop to paint flowers into a PNG — do I own the resulting image? Code is bytes of text on disk, not much different from bytes of pixel data in a BMP.

If I have to type every character by hand in order to own the bytes, then it would stand that I would have to input every pixel by hand in Paint to own a graphic. No? Even using the Fill tool is automating the creation of those bytes and would mean I don't own them. Right?

I have an intention for some bytes of data to be set. If I use an LLM to set them instead of my own fingers, why are the bytes suddenly not mine?

I do not understand.

Ironic.

The law will change. Probably soon.

The copyright ruling was about prompting without modification. The second you modify the result significantly by hand, the ruling doesn't apply. It also had a huge carve out for any future LLM that was more deterministic, which might apply to people with huge skill and other md files to tram in AI. It just hasnt been tested.

These armchair copyright lawyers need to launch a lawsuit and stick their money where their mouth is instead of creating dumb clickbait nonsense.

Currently pending is Doe v. GitHub, Inc., No. 24-7700 (9th Cir.). https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69495342/doe-et-al-v-gi... Oral arg: https://storage.courtlistener.com/mp3/2026/02/11/doe_v._gith...

Someone else!

All they have to do is show it's close enough to code that was swallowed during training.

Songwriters have been successfully sued for many decades for creating songs that are too close to songs that they probably heard.

Once this line of reasoning gets applied to code, all hell will break loose.