I do consider copilot to be infringing on my AGPL code. That's not a fundamental statement about all machine learning systems. GPT-2 did a lot more direct regu

I do consider copilot to be infringing on my AGPL code. That's not a fundamental statement about all machine learning systems. GPT-2 did a lot more direct regurgitation than GPT-3. GPT-3 tends to be much more transformative, but does still sometimes spit out code / text verbatim. Copilot and codex spit out close enough to my own code that it's clearly creating a derivative work, at least by my read. This is untrodden legal ground, but I think that a lot of this comes down to issues of reasonableness. The reason I used the AGPL license was to create a commons. If copilot played within some reasonably friendly way around that commons, I might not feel bad about it. However: 1) Copilot wants me to pay to use something derived from my own code, where I stuck a license there designed precisely NOT to be in that position. 2) Copilot provides a competitive advantage to proprietary projects who are more likely to be able to afford it, over open-source / community ones. The reason I used an AGPL license was because I thought we needed this type of code to be open and transparent. I work in a domain where transparency is essential (I don't disclose domain, but you can think of transparency in government, education, voting, medical, police, etc.) 3) I have no way to have a conversation with anyone at github / Microsoft. They took my stuff, and they won't talk to me about how they use it. It's automated systems all the way down. 4) The whole Open AI nonprofit -> for-profit transformation is just sleazeball. Given all the talk about ethical use of AI, something like this really leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I don't mind DeepMind, FAIR, etc., since they're honest about their goals. Open AI feels like a Silicon Valley get-rich-quick scheme with a lot of nice marketing copy and legally-questionable tactics. Jury, judges, and developers are swayed by common sense. People like me can be swayed to testify one way or another based on whether we feel cheated. What Microsoft / github / Open AI did here wasn't very reasonable, friendly, or sensible. TL;DR: I support the concept of co-pilot in essence. The specifics here feel illegal and sleazy.