IANAL but I don't see a double-rot13 "machine process" as any defense against demonstrably identical code. Just because it passes through a process doesn't make

IANAL but I don't see a double-rot13 "machine process" as any defense against demonstrably identical code. Just because it passes through a process doesn't make it clean. There were numerous examples of whole functions and code blocks repeated verbatim from its source material. I'm not sure the state of the application now, but the effort to prove an output snippet isn't copyrighted with restrictions by the source feels like an O(N) problem that nobody would want to ever do. At best, if copilot told you explicitly (by doing the very hard work of identifying the likely sources of the code output ) you could make some (more) informed decisions as to if it's worth the risk to include it.