• [OT] AIs and Intellectual property

    From Rhino@no_offline_contact@example.com to rec.arts.tv on Sat Dec 6 12:05:30 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    I just had an interested conversation with Gemini, Google's AI, on the
    subject of intellectual property. I have developed an app - actually, a related pair of apps - to play a simple, well-known game with some new variations. We've got the apps working - if not yet fully polished - and
    I asked it some questions about intellectual property. I was quite
    surprised by the answer.

    ~~~

    Me: If I were to do something like publish our version of the apps and monetize them, would Gemini or Google insist on a share of any income
    made from them? Does Google retain any intellectual property in things
    that are developed with the assistance of Gemini?

    Gemini: Intellectual Property and Monetization
    Regarding your legal questions, here is the official position regarding
    code generated with the assistance of Gemini:

    Ownership and Monetization:

    You Own the Output: Code and content (like the text, HTML, and
    JavaScript) that you generate using Gemini and integrate into your
    project are generally considered your creation.

    No Royalty or Share: Google does not claim a share of the income or
    insist on royalties from commercial applications or projects you build
    with the assistance of Gemini. If you choose to publish and monetize
    this version of Hangman, the resulting income belongs entirely to you.

    Intellectual Property (IP):

    Google Retains IP for the Model: Google retains the intellectual
    property rights in the Gemini model itself, the underlying technology,
    and the data it was trained on.

    Your Code is Your IP: The specific code written in the immersive for
    your application (the HTML, JavaScript logic, CSS styling, etc.) is
    considered your intellectual property, assuming the output does not
    violate third-party rights (e.g., copyright for the source phrase lists,
    which are common knowledge terms in this case).

    In summary: You are free to use the code we developed together commercially.

    ~~~

    I was just about certain that the answer would be something along the
    lines of "Of course we retain intellectual property in this
    collaboration: we did a lot of the work and want to get paid for our
    efforts. We own 51% of this collaboration and you'll be hearing from our lawyers if you don't pay up."

    Of course all the AIs tell you up front that they can make mistakes and
    urge you to double-check anything that is important so maybe a lawyer
    would say Google really *does* have IP in the collaboration.

    Still, this seems pretty fundamental and I'd be shocked if the AI answer
    was a complete reversal of the truth, although it may miss a nuance here
    or there.

    Do any of you have any knowledge on this subject that would either
    confirm or contradict Gemini's answer?
    --
    Rhino

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From shawn@nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com to rec.arts.tv on Sat Dec 6 12:10:51 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 12:05:30 -0500, Rhino
    <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

    I just had an interested conversation with Gemini, Google's AI, on the >subject of intellectual property. I have developed an app - actually, a >related pair of apps - to play a simple, well-known game with some new >variations. We've got the apps working - if not yet fully polished - and
    I asked it some questions about intellectual property. I was quite
    surprised by the answer.


    I wasn't. With so many companies not only using AI but pushing AI on
    their employees it's clear that the lawyers would have been over any
    contract to make sure that Google or Microsoft or anyone else
    providing AI services doesn't maintain any ownership in the content
    produced via AI.

    If Google did retain even a 5% ownership in the code produced via AI
    it would have killed most of the interest in using the product.
    ~~~

    Me: If I were to do something like publish our version of the apps and >monetize them, would Gemini or Google insist on a share of any income
    made from them? Does Google retain any intellectual property in things
    that are developed with the assistance of Gemini?

    Gemini: Intellectual Property and Monetization
    Regarding your legal questions, here is the official position regarding
    code generated with the assistance of Gemini:

    Ownership and Monetization:

    You Own the Output: Code and content (like the text, HTML, and
    JavaScript) that you generate using Gemini and integrate into your
    project are generally considered your creation.

    No Royalty or Share: Google does not claim a share of the income or
    insist on royalties from commercial applications or projects you build
    with the assistance of Gemini. If you choose to publish and monetize
    this version of Hangman, the resulting income belongs entirely to you.

    Intellectual Property (IP):

    Google Retains IP for the Model: Google retains the intellectual
    property rights in the Gemini model itself, the underlying technology,
    and the data it was trained on.

    Your Code is Your IP: The specific code written in the immersive for
    your application (the HTML, JavaScript logic, CSS styling, etc.) is >considered your intellectual property, assuming the output does not
    violate third-party rights (e.g., copyright for the source phrase lists, >which are common knowledge terms in this case).

    In summary: You are free to use the code we developed together commercially.

    ~~~

    I was just about certain that the answer would be something along the
    lines of "Of course we retain intellectual property in this
    collaboration: we did a lot of the work and want to get paid for our >efforts. We own 51% of this collaboration and you'll be hearing from our >lawyers if you don't pay up."

    Of course all the AIs tell you up front that they can make mistakes and
    urge you to double-check anything that is important so maybe a lawyer
    would say Google really *does* have IP in the collaboration.

    Still, this seems pretty fundamental and I'd be shocked if the AI answer
    was a complete reversal of the truth, although it may miss a nuance here
    or there.

    Do any of you have any knowledge on this subject that would either
    confirm or contradict Gemini's answer?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From moviePig@nobody@nowhere.com to rec.arts.tv on Sat Dec 6 12:24:59 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 12/6/2025 12:10 PM, shawn wrote:
    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 12:05:30 -0500, Rhino
    <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

    I just had an interested conversation with Gemini, Google's AI, on the
    subject of intellectual property. I have developed an app - actually, a
    related pair of apps - to play a simple, well-known game with some new
    variations. We've got the apps working - if not yet fully polished - and
    I asked it some questions about intellectual property. I was quite
    surprised by the answer.


    I wasn't. With so many companies not only using AI but pushing AI on
    their employees it's clear that the lawyers would have been over any
    contract to make sure that Google or Microsoft or anyone else
    providing AI services doesn't maintain any ownership in the content
    produced via AI.

    If Google did retain even a 5% ownership in the code produced via AI
    it would have killed most of the interest in using the product.

    Also, with ownership comes liability...


    ~~~

    Me: If I were to do something like publish our version of the apps and
    monetize them, would Gemini or Google insist on a share of any income
    made from them? Does Google retain any intellectual property in things
    that are developed with the assistance of Gemini?

    Gemini: Intellectual Property and Monetization
    Regarding your legal questions, here is the official position regarding
    code generated with the assistance of Gemini:

    Ownership and Monetization:

    You Own the Output: Code and content (like the text, HTML, and
    JavaScript) that you generate using Gemini and integrate into your
    project are generally considered your creation.

    No Royalty or Share: Google does not claim a share of the income or
    insist on royalties from commercial applications or projects you build
    with the assistance of Gemini. If you choose to publish and monetize
    this version of Hangman, the resulting income belongs entirely to you.

    Intellectual Property (IP):

    Google Retains IP for the Model: Google retains the intellectual
    property rights in the Gemini model itself, the underlying technology,
    and the data it was trained on.

    Your Code is Your IP: The specific code written in the immersive for
    your application (the HTML, JavaScript logic, CSS styling, etc.) is
    considered your intellectual property, assuming the output does not
    violate third-party rights (e.g., copyright for the source phrase lists,
    which are common knowledge terms in this case).

    In summary: You are free to use the code we developed together commercially. >>
    ~~~

    I was just about certain that the answer would be something along the
    lines of "Of course we retain intellectual property in this
    collaboration: we did a lot of the work and want to get paid for our
    efforts. We own 51% of this collaboration and you'll be hearing from our
    lawyers if you don't pay up."

    Of course all the AIs tell you up front that they can make mistakes and
    urge you to double-check anything that is important so maybe a lawyer
    would say Google really *does* have IP in the collaboration.

    Still, this seems pretty fundamental and I'd be shocked if the AI answer
    was a complete reversal of the truth, although it may miss a nuance here
    or there.

    Do any of you have any knowledge on this subject that would either
    confirm or contradict Gemini's answer?

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2