[charcircuit]

The two main points are that:

1. Copyright cannot be assigned to an AI agent.

2. Copyrighted works require human creativity to be applied in order to be copyrighted.

For point 2 this would apply to times were AI one shots a generic prompt. But for these large PRs where multiple prompts are used and a human has decided what the design should be and how the API should look you get the human creativity required for copyright.

In regards to being a derivative work I think it would be hard to argue that an LLM is copying or modifying an existing original work. Even if it came up with an exact duplicate of a piece of code it would be hard to prove that it was a copy and not an independent recreation from scratch.

>the worst possible outcome

The worst possible outcome is they get sued and Anthropic defends them from the copyright infringement claim due to Anthopic's indemnity clause when using Claude Code.

[monocularvision]

That indemnity clause is only for Team, Enterprise and API users. Do you know what was used here?

Also the commercial version is limited to “…Customer and its personnel, successors, and assigns…”. I am very much not a lawyer and couldn’t find definitions of these in the agreement but I am not sure how transferable this indemnity would be to an open source project.

[charcircuit]

I reviewed it and it looks like personal Claude Code subscriptions are not covered, so it's riskier than I claimed.