4 ms·

It would be hard to defend it as "transformative" while it's still possible to get it to spit out large blocks of verbatim (or near-verbatim) copies. That is,

by tyingq 4y ago

It would be hard to defend it as "transformative" while it's still possible to get it to spit out large blocks of verbatim (or near-verbatim) copies. That is, the way GitHub describes Copilot working might pass as fair use. The way it (sometimes) works in real-life will not.

williamcotton 4y ago
The model itself is transformative and is considered separate from the outputs. The outputs will always be a liability for a developer using the tool. So far the outputs are not covered by copyright due to the merger doctrine of the idea-expression distinction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea%E2%80%93expression_distinction#Merger_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea%E2%80%93expression_distin...
- tyingq 4y ago
  Not sure I follow. Forgetting how the tool works, it's sold as a tool that outputs usable code for customers. If it's outputting copyright encumbered code (even occasionally), then Microsoft/Gitlab is going to be liable for that. I don't think an explanation of how it's okay since it's an AI model is going to impress a judge, if the plaintiff shows long passages of verbatim copyrighted code coming out of it.
  - williamcotton 4y ago
    Here's an exhaustive explanation: https://texaslawreview.org/fair-learning/ https://texaslawreview.org/fair-learning/ Here's some relevant case law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whelan_v._Jaslow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whelan_v._Jaslow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_.... Here's some relevant legal doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Comparison_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Compari... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction The only thing I can say is that if there is a tool that is consistently outputting copyright protected works that this burden would not be worth it for most people. But as I have yet to see a single output from my own use or from Twitter that would pass the filtration test I am not worried about my personal liability.

by tyingq 4y ago

williamcotton 4y ago

The model itself is transformative and is considered separate from the outputs. The outputs will always be a liability for a developer using the tool. So far the outputs are not covered by copyright due to the merger doctrine of the idea-expression distinction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea%E2%80%93expression_distinction#Merger_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea%E2%80%93expression_distin...

tyingq 4y ago
Not sure I follow. Forgetting how the tool works, it's sold as a tool that outputs usable code for customers. If it's outputting copyright encumbered code (even occasionally), then Microsoft/Gitlab is going to be liable for that. I don't think an explanation of how it's okay since it's an AI model is going to impress a judge, if the plaintiff shows long passages of verbatim copyrighted code coming out of it.
- williamcotton 4y ago
  Here's an exhaustive explanation: https://texaslawreview.org/fair-learning/ https://texaslawreview.org/fair-learning/ Here's some relevant case law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whelan_v._Jaslow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whelan_v._Jaslow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_.... Here's some relevant legal doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Comparison_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Compari... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction The only thing I can say is that if there is a tool that is consistently outputting copyright protected works that this burden would not be worth it for most people. But as I have yet to see a single output from my own use or from Twitter that would pass the filtration test I am not worried about my personal liability.