So we'll have 100 2-star repositories per software developer containing stolen code and that is somehow a good thing?

It is completely delusional that these copied "works" will have any effect or be used by anyone but the most rabid AI proponents just to make a point.

If there's any stolen code generated by AI, it's certainly not intentional and a DMCA notice would be appreciated. It would be interesting to see how prevalent this is in AI generated code - is anyone doing a study?

Stars will likely go up over time, but more than the stars it's the testing and maintenance over time that's valuable. There's little promotion right now, but there are already some stars, PRs, and issues. In fact, I'm working on merging PRs now.

Well, is slightly modified regurgitated code a copy or not? We have yet to have it answered in the age of AI, but e.g. I could not be selling Mickey Mouse merch with a simple color filter on for long.

Agree it will be interesting to see how things play out. There's enough permissive open-source licensed code available that using that only could be an option.

As for Mickey, is the difference from Oswald enough today?

Poor billionaire Rowling has no protections against the evil corporations. Everyone using this argument has no clue about artists and and writers.

Yes, corporations take a large cut, but creative people welcomed copyright and made the bargain and got fame in the process. Which was always better for them than let Twitch take 70% and be a sharecropper.

Silicon Valley middlemen are far worse than the media and music industry.

The individuals who get rich from copyright are a rarity.

Most mid-list authors make very little from copyright. A lot of the "authors" who make a lot of money from writing are celebs who slap their name on a ghost written work.

> Which was always better for them than let Twitch take 70% and be a sharecropper.

Copyright predates Twitch or giant corporations and was designed to protect the profits of the publishers from the start.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne

Giant corporations started in the early 1600s and back then they had gunboats :-p

there were very few of them though. They constitute a far larger proportion of the economy now.

This is so, but note that publishers were the "giant corporations" of the time.

In this nothing changed. Authors never were and still are not the point of copyright/IP.

Comparatively big for the time, but very small compared to publishing companies how.

The reason you mention 'poor billionaire Rowling' is most likely because she's the only billionaire author that you know by name. If authors regularly became billionaires you'd have left out that name.