4 ms·

I understand the concept of fair use (I think) but I can't see how it applies to Copilot. Google didn't create new books from the contents of existing ones (wh

I understand the concept of fair use (I think) but I can't see how it applies to Copilot. Google didn't create new books from the contents of existing ones (whether you agree that they should have been allowed to store the books or not) but Copilot is creating new code/apps from existing ones. Edit: I guess my understanding of fair use was wrong. I stand corrected.

AaronFriel 5y ago
If Google Books were creating new books, that would only help their argument. Transformativeness is one of the four parts of the fair use test. Copilot producing new, novel works (which may contain short verbatim snippets of GPL works) is a strong argument for transformativeness.
- FemmeAndroid 5y ago
  It would help the transformativeness, but it would substantially change the effect upon the market. By creating competing products with the copyrighted material, there is a higher degree of transformative, but you also end up disrupting the marketplace. I don't know how a court would decide this, but I do think the facts in future GPT-3 cases are sufficiently different from Author's Guild that I could see it going any way. Plus, I think the prevalence of GPT-3 and the ramifications of the ruling one way or another could lead some future case to be heard by the Supreme Court. A similar case could come up in California, or another state where the 2nd Circuit Artist Guild case isn't precedent.
- peteradio 5y ago
  > short verbatim snippets of GPL works Define short
unanswered 5y ago
That you apparently think fair use is something you just think about real hard in order to see how you feel about it in a given situation demonstrates that you do not understand the concept of fair use. There are rules.
- _Understated_ 5y ago
  Yeah, I realise that now. However, where does one draw the line between fair use and derivative works? Creating something based on other stuff (Google creating AI books from the existing ones for example) would possibly be fair use I think but would it not also be derivative works?
  - thrashh 5y ago
    There's no clear line and there can never be because the world is too complex. We leave up determination to the court system. Google Books is considered fair use because they got sued and successfully used fair use as a defense. Until someone sues over Copilot, everyone is an armchair lawyer.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  I don’t disagree with your point but was it necessary to make it in such a snarky way?
  - unanswered 5y ago
    Have you found a better way to defeat Dunning-Kruger? Your comment is entirely unconstructive as it does not suggest an alternative course of action. Criticism on HN should strive to be constructive, or failing that to be left unsaid.
    - dang 5y ago
      Would you please stop breaking the site guidelines? You've been doing it repeatedly and it's not cool. Please just be kind. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - unanswered 5y ago
        This is the clearest display yet that moderation on HN has absolutely nothing to do with your purported values like constructive criticism, and has everything to do with whether dang agrees with you or not.

AaronFriel 5y ago

If Google Books were creating new books, that would only help their argument. Transformativeness is one of the four parts of the fair use test. Copilot producing new, novel works (which may contain short verbatim snippets of GPL works) is a strong argument for transformativeness.

FemmeAndroid 5y ago
It would help the transformativeness, but it would substantially change the effect upon the market. By creating competing products with the copyrighted material, there is a higher degree of transformative, but you also end up disrupting the marketplace. I don't know how a court would decide this, but I do think the facts in future GPT-3 cases are sufficiently different from Author's Guild that I could see it going any way. Plus, I think the prevalence of GPT-3 and the ramifications of the ruling one way or another could lead some future case to be heard by the Supreme Court. A similar case could come up in California, or another state where the 2nd Circuit Artist Guild case isn't precedent.
peteradio 5y ago
> short verbatim snippets of GPL works Define short

unanswered 5y ago

That you apparently think fair use is something you just think about real hard in order to see how you feel about it in a given situation demonstrates that you do not understand the concept of fair use. There are rules.

_Understated_ 5y ago
Yeah, I realise that now. However, where does one draw the line between fair use and derivative works? Creating something based on other stuff (Google creating AI books from the existing ones for example) would possibly be fair use I think but would it not also be derivative works?
- thrashh 5y ago
  There's no clear line and there can never be because the world is too complex. We leave up determination to the court system. Google Books is considered fair use because they got sued and successfully used fair use as a defense. Until someone sues over Copilot, everyone is an armchair lawyer.
elliekelly 5y ago
I don’t disagree with your point but was it necessary to make it in such a snarky way?
- unanswered 5y ago
  Have you found a better way to defeat Dunning-Kruger? Your comment is entirely unconstructive as it does not suggest an alternative course of action. Criticism on HN should strive to be constructive, or failing that to be left unsaid.
  - dang 5y ago
    Would you please stop breaking the site guidelines? You've been doing it repeatedly and it's not cool. Please just be kind. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - unanswered 5y ago
      This is the clearest display yet that moderation on HN has absolutely nothing to do with your purported values like constructive criticism, and has everything to do with whether dang agrees with you or not.