Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

Re:Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fabl... by wongarsu on Friday June 12, 2026 @05:45AM (#48501947)

Because you are human, and can thus create copyrighted works, and can assign that copyright when you do work for hire. Monkeys and AIs can't create copyrighted works, so there is nothing to assign when doing it for hire

The other line of argument avoids that issue by arguing that you personally created the code with the help of a tool (like a compiler or camera), not just commissioned it

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fabl... by amarant on Friday June 12, 2026 @08:04AM (#48503070)

Sure, but that's not what GP stated at all, unless possibly if they're anthropomorphizing to the point that they refer to Claude as "someone".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fabl... by wongarsu on Friday June 12, 2026 @08:15AM (#48503162)

GP's (or rather GGGP's) statement was "I did not write that code but I paid money". So they claim no authorship. Anthropic is a company, they can't be the author either. So the only one left as author in that reasoning is Claude.

I don't think that necessarily anthropomorphizes it. We speak of monkeys as authors without calling them human. And really the legally important fact is that there was no human author. You can also treat it like CCTV footage which is generally not under copyright because there is no human author (even though most would hesitate to call the camera the author either)

[ Parent | on HN ]