You keep ownership of everything you put into Cody and everything Cody produces for you, but you are responsible for making sure the generated code does not violate any software licenses or copyright.
This analysis describes what Sourcegraph Cody's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
The terms assert user ownership of AI-generated outputs, which is a notable commitment, but the accompanying responsibility clause places compliance obligations for license and copyright adherence on the user rather than Sourcegraph.
Interpretive note: The legal status of AI-generated output ownership is unsettled across major jurisdictions and the document's assertion may not reflect applicable law in all contexts.
Users retain ownership of code inputs and Cody-generated outputs under this provision, but the terms also assign users responsibility for ensuring generated code snippets comply with software licenses and copyright law, which may require independent review of AI-generated code before use in production.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle User Ownership of Inputs and Outputs and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Monitoring
Sourcegraph Cody has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 10 platforms.
"As between the parties, you own all inputs to and outputs generated by your use of Cody. You retain ownership of your code and responsibility for ensuring any code snippets emitted by Cody comply with software licenses and copyright law.— Excerpt from Sourcegraph Cody's Sourcegraph Cody Usage and Privacy
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: This provision engages copyright law in the relevant jurisdiction, including the US Copyright Act and EU copyright directives, particularly regarding the ownership and copyrightability of AI-generated outputs. The enforceability of ownership assertions over AI-generated content remains an area of active legal development in multiple jurisdictions, and the document's assertion of user ownership may not align with how courts or regulators ultimately determine AI output ownership. The FTC has oversight over unfair or deceptive practices related to AI product representations. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. The provision asserts user ownership of AI outputs, but the legal status of AI-generated code under copyright law is unsettled in the US, EU, and other jurisdictions. Organizations relying on this ownership assertion for commercial use of generated code may face legal uncertainty. JURISDICTION FLAGS: US, EU, and UK jurisdictions each have evolving frameworks for AI-generated content ownership. In the US, the Copyright Office has indicated that purely AI-generated content without sufficient human authorship may not be copyrightable, which could affect the practical scope of the ownership assertion. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Procurement teams should note that Sourcegraph's ownership grant is contingent on the user's compliance with software licenses and copyright law. Downstream commercial use of Cody-generated code may require independent IP review, and indemnification obligations under Section VI are separate from this ownership clause. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should assess the interaction between this ownership clause and Section VI IP indemnification to understand the full scope of protections and obligations. Organizations using Cody-generated code in commercial products may want to establish internal review processes for AI-generated outputs.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Watcher: 10 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Professional Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Professional includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
The terms assert user ownership of AI-generated outputs, which is a notable commitment, but the accompanying responsibility clause places compliance obligations for license and copyright adherence on the user rather than Sourcegraph.
Users retain ownership of code inputs and Cody-generated outputs under this provision, but the terms also assign users responsibility for ensuring generated code snippets comply with software licenses and copyright law, which may require independent review of AI-generated code before use in production.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Sourcegraph Cody.