this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2026
658 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

84019 readers
3316 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
658
Linux lays down the law on AI-generated code, says yes to Copilot, no to AI slop, and humans take the fall for mistakes — after months of fierce debate, Torvalds and maintainers come to an agreement (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 1 week ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/technology@lemmy.world
272 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If I use a copyright-infringing work as a part of a new creative work, does that new work infringe copyright by default?

No, see reaction content, parody content, etc. They all undoubtedly use copyrighted work and they don't automatically infringe on copyright by default.

And if it is judged as infringing, who is responsible for the damage done? Can I pass the damages back to the original infringing work? Or should I be held responsible for not performing due diligence?

The infringing party is the human that used the tool which generated the infringing work. Everything after that is exactly the same applicaton of copyright law just as if you were selling pictures of Mickey Mouse that you drew yourself. Disney can sue you, they can't sue the pencil manufacturer.

[–] anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

Yup

People want to pretend as if everything that flows downstream from the creation of LLMs is illegal, but that's just not the reality.