[Tomte]

Those questions are all interesting in themselves, but utterly irrelevant here.

The first one asks if someone else than the „prompter“ should have copyright.

The second one asks about other people‘s copyright.

The third one is answered by case law, including the Monkey Selfie case. The wildlife photography setup is very much comparable to your typewriter there.

[FireInsight]

If there's a thousand monkeys with a thousand typewriters, and they all write a single page to a thousand-page epic, is the scientist allowed to copyright and sell it as a book?

[lupire]

In the US, absolutely. The scientist set up the conditions and curated the output, and animals have no creative copyright privileges of their own.

[lupire]

You're losing the plot and contradicting yourself across your comments.

What exactly is the thesis you are trying to argue?

[hnfong]

The wildlife photography setup had no human intervention when the photo was created since the monkey took the selfie.

In this case TinyLetter was "written" by GPT4o with a LOT of prompting. Have you even read it? https://github.com/i365dev/LetterDrop/blob/main/docs/CDDR/ap...

As always, some random person in a tech forum thinks they have all the answers to non-trivial legal questions...

I mean, we haven't even talked about jurisdiction issues yet. US case law does not apply globally.

[lupire]

LetterDrop, not TinyLetter!

[hnfong]

My bad.