People pontificating about whether codebases containing LLM-generated code are subject to IP protection all seem to be forgetting the key point that the law always sides with capital
When big media decided that pirating an mp3 file should be a criminal (not civil) offence, the law sided with them
When big tech decided that pirating every piece of media on the internet for AI training was fair use, the law sided with them
Sure there will be some border skirmishes where IP owner interests clash, but in the end the law will settle on whatever makes the people who pay the lawmakers happy
Instead of trying to read legal precedents like tea leaves, just ask yourself who benefits?
Does big tech benefit from the commons being able to legally appropriate their IP because they used AI in its creation?
Obviously not
So that obviously won't happen
The handwringing about the implications for open source codebases is also especially hilarious
I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, but the answer to the question "does this mean people can now take my MIT-licensed code without attribution if I used a coding assistant?" is that they were already doing that, long before LLMs
If you're lucky, that will continue to be the case. If you're unlucky, then everyone will just vibe code their own solutions and your project will die in obscurity
