It doesn't mean that. A Co-Authored-By header isn't a legal signature or legal assertion of AI generated code.
replyIt’s certainly an assertion.
replyIs thos actually decided yet? Closest thing was the image generation cases. What's your go to source for this?
replyNot that simple… this is great read: https://legallayer.substack.com/p/who-owns-the-claude-code-w...
replyStill if you're the lawyer on the side of the lawsuit claiming that the code is copyrightable, you really don't want that copilot attribution in the commit message muddying the waters.
replyOutside this instance, how can one prove code was AI generated beyond a reasonable doubt? Also, do you (or anyone else) know how much AI/copied-code has to be modified for it to be considered independent?
replyIf AI generates code, and one just renames some variables/method signatures, then what?
> how can one prove code was AI generated beyond a reasonable doubt?
replySubpoena the provider they use.
Even if they don’t retain the full context, they have to save API calls for billing and analytics. If you’re clauding for the hour up to and after the commit, one can reasonably assume you built it with (if not exclusively by) AI.
> If you’re clauding for the hour up to and after the commit, one can reasonably assume you built it with (if not exclusively by) AI.
replyThat's not beyond a reasonable doubt.