5 ms·
Simply moving away from Github is not enough to protect your code if you see this as a problem. Moving your code away from Github to some open alternative doesn
by onion2k 4y ago
Simply moving away from Github is not enough to protect your code if you see this as a problem. Moving your code away from Github to some open alternative doesn't stop Github consuming it to use in Copilot unless you specifically forbid that in your license. If you code is freely available to use for any purpose, as many open source licenses permit, then that includes using it as training data for a for-profit product.
You need to use a license that restricts its use, and restricts the use of derivatives otherwise someone uploading a fork to Github will just put you back where you started. I think GPL3 would give you such protections, but you should check with a lawyer if this is particularly important to you.
- blueflow 4y agoOr don't license your code at all. Gives you great power with selective enforcement of IP rights.
- amelius 4y agoHuh? What if someone else claims they wrote your code and slaps a license on it?
- yakak 4y agoCopyright is independent of license.
- blueflow 4y agoWhen its my IP i can enforce it, send them a DMCA or sue them for damages. They used my stuff without having a license to do so. If they slapped an own license on it, granting others permission to it, that would increase the damages.
- amelius 4y agoOk, but you'd have to prove it.
- blueflow 4y agoFor git repos, include the current revision of your master branch as metadata to an SEPA transaction. This is a legal solid proof that you had code at time X.
- amelius 4y agoInteresting. Has anyone automated this? It reminds me of: https://notary.bitcoin.com/ https://notary.bitcoin.com/ However, it does not prove that your version of the repository was the first and original one.
- blueflow 4y agoI consider the SEPA tagging a secondary method. If someone was to contest the authorship of my code, i'd challenge them to explain why certain passages were written in that way. Or how specific magic numbers were picked. Linus for example used the birth date of his daughters as magic numbers for the reboot() syscall. Generally i do recommend to avoid cryptocurrencies for anything serious. Its public image is beyond repair.
- CogitoCogito 4y agoThey could do that if you licensed it too. It would be illegal just the same.
- kelnos 4y agoIn most jurisdictions, copyright is automatic. If you put no license on the code, the default is "all rights reserved"; that is, no one can do anything with it.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y agoAGPL sure but i would say SSPL is better in the sense that they would have to give out source code of copilot and everything in and around it. i would love if github does that once
- chrismorgan 4y agoPeople keep getting this wrong. Your license is irrelevant. Copilot depends entirely on being exempt from copyright restrictions (under fair use doctrine), and you cannot restrict this with any license, because they're not using that license. The only way you can stop them using your code so is to not share it with anyone. If they find your code (even via a leak!), they can legally use it, if their fair use claim is correct.
- thruuavay 4y agoIf so, then the other edge of the sword may be sharp enough. Collect all bigco source code leaks and create a fancy Schmopilot model out of it. Publish said model on GitHub.
- ShamelessC 4y agoI suspect any such model will have weird biases that don't match public usage. Monolith code can be impressive, but it probably only happens outside the context window of Copilot.
- alpaca128 4y agoThe functionality doesn't matter. Such a project would exist to show Microsoft what it's like to be on the other end of their shady practices.
- ShamelessC 4y agoI seriously doubt they would care.
- formerly_proven 4y agoCopilot being fair use is what Microsoft claims (obviously), not an established fact. There is no precedent for this claim. (Nitpick: Fair use isn't an exemption from copyright, it's a defense for violating copyright)
- dragonwriter 4y ago> Simply moving away from Github is not enough to protect your code if you see this as a problem. Moving your code away from Github to some open alternative doesn't stop Github consuming it to use in Copilot unless you specifically forbid that in your license. I mean it does in the short term, because Microsoft trains it on public GitHub code. Beyond that, as long as Microsoft is operating under their “fair use” theory, licensing is irrelevant: if they decide to expand their funnel to public code from outside of GitHub, yours will get sucked in if it is public, regardless of license, since their entire theory is they don't need a license.
- alpaca128 4y agoWould this still apply if the license explicitly forbids use for AI training?
- dragonwriter 4y agoYes, if it is a use that doesn't require permission from the copyright owner, the license is irrelevant (unless you can demonstrate that the person doing the license-prohibited use agreed to the license anyway, in some context that makes it legally binding such as a contract.)
- tyingq 4y ago>Microsoft trains it on public GitHub code They seem to say that's not the only source. "What data has GitHub Copilot been trained on? GitHub Copilot is powered by Codex, a generative pretrained AI model created by OpenAI. It has been trained on natural language text and source code from publicly available sources, including code in public repositories on GitHub"