Claude is not a person and AI doesn't gain authorship let alone copyright.
Unless you literally vibe coded it, Claude is just a tool. This is the equivalent of Apple appending "Sent from my iPhone" as a signature to outgoing emails. It's advertising tool use, not providing attribution. The intent isn't to disclose that AI was used in creating the code, the intent is to advertise the AI product.
Hmm... It's an interesting question: at what point, in a conversation, document, image, story, does human authorship end and AI authorship begin? How would you know? Is it a tell tale or is it advertising?
> Unless you literally vibe coded it, Claude is just a tool.
Stop with the selective bias, two are birds of the same feather, they are using a "tool" to write the code for them from whatever (questionable) mashed up source they are trained from, in the same way someone is using AI as a "tool" to fabricate their curriculum and cheat a job
> The intent isn't to disclose that AI was used in creating the code, the intent is to advertise the AI product
That is a wild mental gymnastic to justify dishonestly submitting code you didn't write (or own) as yours. It has nothing to do with advertisement but proper attribution, you know it.
There's some repos I'm unashamedly keeping alive with Claude alone and he gets co-authorship - basically stuff in "maintenance mode" that I still use that I've forked and had Claude drag it into 2026
A quick PR where I've found the bug myself in the code, and ask Claude to write the fix because it's faster, and verified it - I don't include Claude's co-authorship.
It's only dishonest not to include Claude in commit/PR attribution if it's also dishonest not to include StackOverflow, or VSCode, or VIM, or Windows, or any of the other tools you used to complete the work!
But I want to see Claude on the contributor list so that I immediately know if I should give the rest of the repo any attention!
So turn it off.
"includeCoAuthoredBy": false,
in your settings.json.
They changed it to `attribution`, but yes you can customize this
Why not? What's wrong with honesty?
Yeah I much prefer it commit the agent, and I would also like if it committed the model I was using at the time.
Claude is not a person and AI doesn't gain authorship let alone copyright.
Unless you literally vibe coded it, Claude is just a tool. This is the equivalent of Apple appending "Sent from my iPhone" as a signature to outgoing emails. It's advertising tool use, not providing attribution. The intent isn't to disclose that AI was used in creating the code, the intent is to advertise the AI product.
Hmm... It's an interesting question: at what point, in a conversation, document, image, story, does human authorship end and AI authorship begin? How would you know? Is it a tell tale or is it advertising?
> Unless you literally vibe coded it, Claude is just a tool.
Stop with the selective bias, two are birds of the same feather, they are using a "tool" to write the code for them from whatever (questionable) mashed up source they are trained from, in the same way someone is using AI as a "tool" to fabricate their curriculum and cheat a job
> The intent isn't to disclose that AI was used in creating the code, the intent is to advertise the AI product
That is a wild mental gymnastic to justify dishonestly submitting code you didn't write (or own) as yours. It has nothing to do with advertisement but proper attribution, you know it.
There's some repos I'm unashamedly keeping alive with Claude alone and he gets co-authorship - basically stuff in "maintenance mode" that I still use that I've forked and had Claude drag it into 2026
A quick PR where I've found the bug myself in the code, and ask Claude to write the fix because it's faster, and verified it - I don't include Claude's co-authorship.
I guess Im sometimes dishonest when it suits me
It's only dishonest not to include Claude in commit/PR attribution if it's also dishonest not to include StackOverflow, or VSCode, or VIM, or Windows, or any of the other tools you used to complete the work!
2 replies →
Because some maintainers are hysterical