4 ms·

https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-terms-of-service#d-user-generated-content https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-

by mey 4y ago

https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-terms-of-service#d-user-generated-content https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-t... GitHub has a separate policy...

fartcannon 4y ago
Thank you, I missed that part. As I asked elsewhere, where is the part of these agreements that permits them to profit off my IP through copilot?
- vel0city 4y ago
  If your code was in a private repo they supposedly didn't use it for training. I think it was also mentioned they tried to limit it to only repos where they could determine some kind of license they thought would permit such usage. If you're publishing your IP to GitHub in a public repo and using a widely permissive license, they didn't need an agreement to use that IP to train copilot.
  - fartcannon 4y ago
    There needs to be a line somewhere that says, "if you use a widely permissive license, we will use your IP to make money for ourselves" or something like that, then, right? That's what I want. To find that line.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - vel0city 4y ago
      Do they need to have such a statement? What makes them need to make such a statement? You've given them the permission with the copyright license you've published your code with.
      - fartcannon 4y ago
        Yes it's required, at no point did any license I assign my code give them permission to sell my IP as a part of copilot.
        vel0city 4y ago
        Which licenses do you use and where in the licenses does it state it couldn't be used as training data?
        fartcannon 4y ago
        My license says something along the lines of "This is totally free, except for use by Microsoft and Github in anything they develop or sell." So, where does it say they can use my IP?
        vel0city 4y ago
        Cool. Call an IP lawyer, sue Microsoft, and enjoy retirement on your new boat. Or I guess you didn't really have any IP of value that was infringed on whatever license you claim to have made.
        fartcannon 4y ago
        Dang, I was hoping you or someone could help. Anyways thanks for participating in the discussion none the less.
        vel0city 4y ago
        If you're not just being facetious then that someone who can help is an IP lawyer, and I congratulate you on your new boat. I'm not being fake with that. Buf if you published your code with an MIT or GPL kind of license chances are they don't owe you anything nor do they have to say that it's using your code. IANAL, but nothing in those common licenses leads me to believe they owe you even that statement. If I'm wrong feel free to point to it. You're not really engaging in this discussion much more than giving extremely vague hypotheticals and then making demands that seem like quite a leap. Where in, say the GPL, would they have to make a statement like you claim they need to? What are the actual terms in your public license and code that you have that they would have infringed in some manner? The repo would have to be public and you just said it would be free, so please do link it. Otherwise, what are we even talking about here? Just making noise on the internet I guess?

by mey 4y ago

https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-terms-of-service#d-user-generated-content https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-t... GitHub has a separate policy...

fartcannon 4y ago

Thank you, I missed that part. As I asked elsewhere, where is the part of these agreements that permits them to profit off my IP through copilot?

vel0city 4y ago
If your code was in a private repo they supposedly didn't use it for training. I think it was also mentioned they tried to limit it to only repos where they could determine some kind of license they thought would permit such usage. If you're publishing your IP to GitHub in a public repo and using a widely permissive license, they didn't need an agreement to use that IP to train copilot.
- fartcannon 4y ago
  There needs to be a line somewhere that says, "if you use a widely permissive license, we will use your IP to make money for ourselves" or something like that, then, right? That's what I want. To find that line.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - vel0city 4y ago
    Do they need to have such a statement? What makes them need to make such a statement? You've given them the permission with the copyright license you've published your code with.
    - fartcannon 4y ago
      Yes it's required, at no point did any license I assign my code give them permission to sell my IP as a part of copilot.
      - vel0city 4y ago
        Which licenses do you use and where in the licenses does it state it couldn't be used as training data?
        fartcannon 4y ago
        My license says something along the lines of "This is totally free, except for use by Microsoft and Github in anything they develop or sell." So, where does it say they can use my IP?
        vel0city 4y ago
        Cool. Call an IP lawyer, sue Microsoft, and enjoy retirement on your new boat. Or I guess you didn't really have any IP of value that was infringed on whatever license you claim to have made.
        fartcannon 4y ago
        Dang, I was hoping you or someone could help. Anyways thanks for participating in the discussion none the less.
        vel0city 4y ago
        If you're not just being facetious then that someone who can help is an IP lawyer, and I congratulate you on your new boat. I'm not being fake with that. Buf if you published your code with an MIT or GPL kind of license chances are they don't owe you anything nor do they have to say that it's using your code. IANAL, but nothing in those common licenses leads me to believe they owe you even that statement. If I'm wrong feel free to point to it. You're not really engaging in this discussion much more than giving extremely vague hypotheticals and then making demands that seem like quite a leap. Where in, say the GPL, would they have to make a statement like you claim they need to? What are the actual terms in your public license and code that you have that they would have infringed in some manner? The repo would have to be public and you just said it would be free, so please do link it. Otherwise, what are we even talking about here? Just making noise on the internet I guess?