[hnbad]

Claude is not a person and AI doesn't gain authorship let alone copyright.

Unless you literally vibe coded it, Claude is just a tool. This is the equivalent of Apple appending "Sent from my iPhone" as a signature to outgoing emails. It's advertising tool use, not providing attribution. The intent isn't to disclose that AI was used in creating the code, the intent is to advertise the AI product.

[VectorVault]

Hmm... It's an interesting question: at what point, in a conversation, document, image, story, does human authorship end and AI authorship begin? How would you know? Is it a tell tale or is it advertising?

[flykespice]

> Unless you literally vibe coded it, Claude is just a tool.

Stop with the selective bias, two are birds of the same feather, they are using a "tool" to write the code for them from whatever (questionable) mashed up source they are trained from, in the same way someone is using AI as a "tool" to fabricate their curriculum and cheat a job

> The intent isn't to disclose that AI was used in creating the code, the intent is to advertise the AI product

That is a wild mental gymnastic to justify dishonestly submitting code you didn't write (or own) as yours. It has nothing to do with advertisement but proper attribution, you know it.