4 ms·
> The issue is fundamentally a PR one, not a copyright one, since the responsibility for using or not using the code relies on the end-user. Copilot's FAQ says
by foxfluff 5y ago
> The issue is fundamentally a PR one, not a copyright one, since the responsibility for using or not using the code relies on the end-user.
Copilot's FAQ says this (under heading Who owns the code GitHub Copilot helps me write?): "GitHub Copilot is a tool, like a compiler or a pen. The suggestions GitHub Copilot generates, and the code you write with its help, belong to you, and you are responsible for it."
They are essentially affirming that the output is not covered by someone else's copyright, but that is far from clear.
And I think it is precisely the copyright issue that turned this into a PR issue. Verbatim copies are just a very obvious demonstration of the copyright issue. The issue isn't gone when they filter out this specific snippet; the people who are concerned about copyright issues are going to remain concerned.
> GitHub has the rights to use your code for training.
Sure, but that's not at all the same as saying that the output produced by the AI free of copyright issues. That's kind of orthogonal.
- freeone3000 5y agoIf you use a pen to write out a copy of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, then publish copies, you are guilty of copyright infringement, not the pen.
- foxfluff 5y agoAnd the sky is blue. Look, we're not talking about what you write out, we're talking about what the ML model generates for you and what Microsoft claims about the ownership of the generated output. At this point I don't feel like you're arguing in good faith. Have a good one.