4 ms·

Yes, software copyright and patents are a mistake.

thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
>> Yes, software copyright and patents are a mistake. Richard Stallman would agree, but there are many of us who make a living writing software. Is software valuable enough that people will pay money for it? If you write original software that solves a problem, shouldn't you be able to license it how you want and profit from it? You are welcome to license the software you create how you want. Let me license the software I create how I want. If I dual license my software as GPL and commercial and GitHub Copilot reproduces my GPLed code without attribution and without the license, how it that not copyright violation?
- rattlesnakedave 4y ago
  Do you find meaningful distinction between an individual reading your code and copying patterns vs an AI model doing the same?
  - thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
    No, provided that both give proper attribution and follow the license the code is released under.
    - rattlesnakedave 4y ago
      That's a hilarious expectation. How often do you give attribution to inventors of patterns you use in your software?
      - thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
        >> How often do you give attribution to inventors of patterns you use in your software? If GitHub Copilot was only "copying patterns" then it would be a lot harder to call it copyright violation and misappropriation of existing code. And yet that is exactly what GitHub Copilot has been accused of doing: recreating copyrighted works without attribution and in violation of the licenses that the code was released under: https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/pdf/1-0-github_complaint.pdf https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/pdf/1-0-github_complaint... https://twitter.com/DocSparse/status/1581461734665367554 https://twitter.com/DocSparse/status/1581461734665367554 >> That's a hilarious expectation. Only if you think lawsuits are funny. Cease and desist orders and damages show that they are no laughing matter.
- boxed 4y ago
  Stallman is pretty hard FOR copyright. The strong guarantees of "free software" is 100% based on strong copyright law.
  - cauefcr 4y ago
    That's not what i get from reading him https://www.globalnerdy.com/2007/07/06/richard-m-stallman-copyright-vs-community-in-the-age-of-computer-networks/ https://www.globalnerdy.com/2007/07/06/richard-m-stallman-co... My favorite part: >Copyright Now >Now with digital data and computer networks, it much easier for us to copy and manipulate information > Digital technology has changed the effect of copyright law > Copyright used to be a power that was: > wielded by authors > over publishers > to yield benefits to the public > Now it’s a power that is: > wielded by publishers > to punish the public > in the name of the authors > Now the public wants to copy and share — what would a democratic government do?

>> Yes, software copyright and patents are a mistake. Richard Stallman would agree, but there are many of us who make a living writing software. Is software valuable enough that people will pay money for it? If you write original software that solves a problem, shouldn't you be able to license it how you want and profit from it? You are welcome to license the software you create how you want. Let me license the software I create how I want. If I dual license my software as GPL and commercial and GitHub Copilot reproduces my GPLed code without attribution and without the license, how it that not copyright violation?

rattlesnakedave 4y ago
Do you find meaningful distinction between an individual reading your code and copying patterns vs an AI model doing the same?
- thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
  No, provided that both give proper attribution and follow the license the code is released under.
  - rattlesnakedave 4y ago
    That's a hilarious expectation. How often do you give attribution to inventors of patterns you use in your software?
    - thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
      >> How often do you give attribution to inventors of patterns you use in your software? If GitHub Copilot was only "copying patterns" then it would be a lot harder to call it copyright violation and misappropriation of existing code. And yet that is exactly what GitHub Copilot has been accused of doing: recreating copyrighted works without attribution and in violation of the licenses that the code was released under: https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/pdf/1-0-github_complaint.pdf https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/pdf/1-0-github_complaint... https://twitter.com/DocSparse/status/1581461734665367554 https://twitter.com/DocSparse/status/1581461734665367554 >> That's a hilarious expectation. Only if you think lawsuits are funny. Cease and desist orders and damages show that they are no laughing matter.
boxed 4y ago
Stallman is pretty hard FOR copyright. The strong guarantees of "free software" is 100% based on strong copyright law.
- cauefcr 4y ago
  That's not what i get from reading him https://www.globalnerdy.com/2007/07/06/richard-m-stallman-copyright-vs-community-in-the-age-of-computer-networks/ https://www.globalnerdy.com/2007/07/06/richard-m-stallman-co... My favorite part: >Copyright Now >Now with digital data and computer networks, it much easier for us to copy and manipulate information > Digital technology has changed the effect of copyright law > Copyright used to be a power that was: > wielded by authors > over publishers > to yield benefits to the public > Now it’s a power that is: > wielded by publishers > to punish the public > in the name of the authors > Now the public wants to copy and share — what would a democratic government do?