undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbilekas3mo ago0 comments

> Nobody is going to sue you for using their implementation of a skybox algorithm from 1999, give us break.

For personal use maybe not, but that's not the point, the point is it's spitting out licensed code and not even letting you know. Now if you're a business who hire exclusively "vibe" coders with zero experience with enterprise software, now you're on the hook and most likely will be sued.

0 comments

mgraczyk3mo ago

Do you have any evidence that it is spitting out licensed code? Did you locate an original that it was copied from?

gitpusher3mo ago

This seems like it could be the source: https://github.com/GPUOpen-LibrariesAndSDKs/Cauldron/blob/ma...

If true, then this usage could violate its MIT License: "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software."

The file seems to have been copied verbatim, more or less. But without the copyright info

bilekasOP3mo ago

This particular case appears to me to be a straight derivative at best but I'm by no means an expert on copyright laws.

That's not to say there hasn't already been more direct cases with set examples [1], from an author directly who would have a better right to claim than I [2], it's not even a stretch to see how it can happen.

[1] https://arxiv.org/html/2408.02487v3

[2] https://x.com/DocSparse/status/1581461734665367554

gpm3mo ago

As discussed repeatedly in this thread already in this particular case the code at hand wasn't generated by an LLM at all, it was simply included from a dependency by the build system.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse