...and makes your code public domain (you just admitted here that you're using it)- if anyone accesses app developed by you, they can use it freely without any license.
Worst thing - you're feeding potentially not your code into GPT. That'd be a fireable offense to me (and a very expensive lawsuit for at least couple places I know). Not an issue if you're lone wolf, though.
It's a dystopian thought, but I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft (which provides such services), when it knows you're using service to create public domain code, could just copy it one-to-one, because hey - free lunch, right?
See sibling poster for general information. There's also matter of "injecting" copyleft code from generator into your own codebase [1], e.g. GPL3 or AGPL.
Few companies are blocking their employees from using it [2] quoting various reasons, and I know some that aren't big enough to matter in the news, but have done it too.
In any case, no one is going to deploy purely AI-generated code in the near future, which would be non-copyrightable. In practice any generated code will be edited by the human developer, and it doesn't take that much creative human input to make the result copyrightable.
Derivative works aren't as easily re-copyrightable. And we're considering context where programmer copy-pasted code from GPT, so probably it won't be rewritten in most chunks.
There's also other part - if there's proof that partial code (even like 10%) is made using non-copyrightable solution it would be very hard to prove that the rest 90% is.
Until the laws address those issues using any code from generator is a huge liability.
> if anyone accesses app developed by you, they can use it freely without any license.
This is simply incorrect on every level, starting with the fact that (in the US, anyway), you can't place your works in the public domain even if you wanted to.
That's not true in at least one case: if you work for the US federal government, all of your works are automatically in the public domain. Of course, they may also be barred from disclosure for other reasons.
You're correct, that's the one exception. Although you could argue that it's not really an exception -- it's that when you're producing IP in the course of your employment, your employer owns the copyright. And if you work for the federal government, your employer is the American people, so in a real sense we collectively hold the copyright. Which is the same as being in the public domain.
Worst thing - you're feeding potentially not your code into GPT. That'd be a fireable offense to me (and a very expensive lawsuit for at least couple places I know). Not an issue if you're lone wolf, though.
It's a dystopian thought, but I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft (which provides such services), when it knows you're using service to create public domain code, could just copy it one-to-one, because hey - free lunch, right?