2 ms·
1. Human brains aren't above the law here either. When producing code that is substantially the same (especially if it's a character for character match of larg
by hansvm 4y ago
1. Human brains aren't above the law here either. When producing code that is substantially the same (especially if it's a character for character match of large swathes of an existing work) it's presumed that you copied it unless you can prove one of a few exceptions like that the code itself wasn't copyrightable (moot point in context), or that you likely hadn't ever seen the original (which copilot explicitly has).
2. Scraping by itself is probably mostly legal. What you do with the scraped information is still subject to copyright and other laws.
- gjsman-1000 4y agoOr, that the work you have reproduced is sufficiently "transformative," which is an exception under "fair use" law. How different is the copy from the original? If I draw Elsa but with a green dress and a different hairstyle, I'm not under Disney's copyright even if my inspiration is clear. Edit: Also, the degree to which it must be transformative is, I would argue, lesser for code. There's only so many ways to implement an algorithm - meaning that if it is slightly different, it may be transformative enough, whereas a more creative and less utility-based outlet like painting may require greater changes.