3 ms·

> The larger issue is that anyone using Github is donating their work for re-use without attribution through Copilot. I think this can only be valid of Github'

> The larger issue is that anyone using Github is donating their work for re-use without attribution through Copilot. I think this can only be valid of Github's terms of use clearly specify that or the chosen license allows it. I actually see copilot benefiting GPL projects: suppose a programmer uses copilot to develop a proprietary software and copilot regurgitates GPL'ed code: now the proprietary software is a derivative work and must be GPL'ed too.

anonymousab 5y ago
Unless copilot serves as a legally effective "laundering" of gpl code. Which sounds silly, but we're now in a situation where that outcome is super desirable to GitHub/Microsoft. Another potential outcome is that so many projects could now end up unknowingly using gpl code that enforcement becomes an impractical whack-a-mole, far more so than today. Being told to rework or relicense your project because of copiloted gpl code could easily end up with hobbyists wholesale begrudging the gpl license rather than copilot itself.
- fault1 5y ago
  > Unless copilot serves as a legally effective "laundering" of gpl code. It's quite interesting how it seems to have come full circle, at least according to this stackoverflow comment about Stallman releasing a paper in 1992 on how to effectively launder AT&T code via textual changes (I have no idea if he did, I just remembered the comment): https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/591221 https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/591221