News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Judge rejects most ChatGPT copyright claims from book aut... by brookst on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @12:12AM (#39366744)
Copyright protects the expression of an idea, such as a series of words or chords. You’d be fine.

Patents protect the implementation of an idea, so you’d be fine.

There is no IP protection for the abstract idea of doing something, and that is as it should be.

Re:Judge rejects most ChatGPT copyright claims from book aut... by Ferret7446 on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @01:14AM (#39367033)
Does that mean you could rewrite, say, Harry Potter from scratch without violating copyright?
Re:Judge rejects most ChatGPT copyright claims from book aut... by lostmsu on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @01:22AM (#39367071)
Yes, but unless you change names it would be a trademark violation.
Re:Judge rejects most ChatGPT copyright claims from book aut... by alexey-salmin on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @03:14AM (#39367666)
Normally that's the case even though at least one of those books was taken down based on (rather dubious imo) violation of rights on derivative works. It was never a verbatim rewrite nor a trademark violation. The Dutch court even proceeded to make a list of similar ideas between two books which I think is explicitly disallowed under the US version of the copyright law.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanya_Grotter

Re:Judge rejects most ChatGPT copyright claims from book aut... by thinkertraveler on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @08:17AM (#39369438)
( Not only that, even what they say it's russian culture and folklore, it's based on polish history and tales: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Łysa_Góra )
Re:Judge rejects most ChatGPT copyright claims from book aut... by brookst on Friday February 16, 2024 @09:22AM (#39397384)
Yes. There are numerous fantasy authors who make a living rewriting Lord of the Rings. Copyright protects the expression, not the ideas.