Or it's fair use. Fair use is what enables the use of samples in musics or the use of photographs by the likes of Andy Warhol to create new works of art. You ca

Or it's fair use. Fair use is what enables the use of samples in musics or the use of photographs by the likes of Andy Warhol to create new works of art. You can also cite literature and other texts. It's a pretty broad notion. So, it's not as black and white as people seem to insist things must be by their limited & flawed understanding of copyright law as it exists in various countries (the world is bigger than the US, and people use co-pilot outside the US). If you ever copied code from a book or a web page, you are doing exactly the same thing as github co-pilot is doing. And it's fine and legal to do so because that is fair use. That's why fair use exist: so we can actually use the information that is shared with us via copyrighted works. You can't restrict fair use with a license; so the original license is not relevant here. It applies to distributing the whole copyrighted work, not bits and pieces of it. The only legal question that might exist around Github co-pilot is whether it can be defended as fair use. It probably is but it would need to be challenged in a court to get that verified. So, we might know in a decade or so if somebody actually feels like spending a few million on kick-starting that process (best of luck!). And you'd actually have to go after users of github co-pilot as Github neatly deflects responsibility to the end user. All they do is show you some code.