There isn't a definition. The FAQ states: People who maintain popular open source projects receive a credit to have 12 months of GitHub Copilot access

There isn't a definition. The FAQ states: People who maintain popular open source projects receive a credit to have 12 months of GitHub Copilot access for free. A maintainer of a popular open source project is defined as someone who has write or admin access to one or more of the most popular open source projects on GitHub. Simply visit the GitHub Copilot subscription page to see if you are one of the open source maintainers that meet our criteria for a complimentary subscription. If you do, you should see that you can add GitHub Copilot for no charge. If you see a charge on the purchase page then this means that you do not qualify at this time. Once awarded, if you are still a maintainer of a popular open source project when your initial 12 months subscription expires then you will be able to renew your subscription for free. As the principal author of a project used by millions, working 100% on open source today, I can say it's not free for me. My code is being used to train your models, but I can't use your models without paying you. That goes against the spirit of my share-alike license. "Write or admin access" is also a pretty crappy way of evaluating people. "Write or admin access" goes by politics, rather than by contribution. It's also hostile towards junior developers, who might not have commit access on projects which work by forks and PRs. This also excludes folks like Richard Stallman who don't host their projects with you (not that he'd use copilot, but just saying). github does a fine job reviewing nonprofits. It feels half-baked that it can't identify open-source contributors. At the very least, you should enable anyone whose code you scraped to train codex to use codex. I can make codex spit out code very similar to code I wrote. It's clear it was trained on it, and is creating a derivative work.