4 ms·
Not even copyleft licenses prohibit somebody from earning money from what you released, and that includes Microsoft. The idea behind free software is that it be
by necovek 5y ago
Not even copyleft licenses prohibit somebody from earning money from what you released, and that includes Microsoft. The idea behind free software is that it benefits all users equally, even if other developers get the biggest direct benefit.
The best question to ask yourself is if you would be annoyed as much if a company like Black Duck did a similar training or analysis with their OpenHub (openhub.net)?
I think one could even make a case for training an AI in this manner from the leaked Windows code: copyright law treats these generally as "fair use", though how you gained the copy of the code might still be illegal.
IANAL though :)
- drran 5y agoYou need to comply with license first before you can use it to defense your position. Copilot doesn't comply with opensource licenses, so authors of Copilot lost the right to use opensource licensed code permanently, until they settle the case with authors of the code.
- wffurr 5y agoCC-BY-NC explicitly prohibits commercial usage. It’s also common to see GPL license for non-commercial usage and paid licenses for commercial usage.
- necovek 5y agoDual licensing with a copyleft license is common if you want to offer an ability for someone to develop a closed-source project: they can perfectly develop a GPL-licensed commercial project without paying anything. If CC-BY-NC prohibits commercial use, it is not an open source or free software license (which have compatible definitions, but differ in motivations). AFAIK, Creative Commons was set to create a set of licenses in the spirit of open source for creative works, and I wouldn't expect them to be open source at all.