The key distinction I'm interested in is providing the GitHub (or any similar product) "Service" vs selling a separate, derived product (Copilot / ChatGPT). A:

The key distinction I'm interested in is providing the GitHub (or any similar product) "Service" vs selling a separate, derived product (Copilot / ChatGPT). A: Common ToS to say that a product's owner obtains a license to user content for purposes of providing that user the product service. B: Somewhat common ToS to extend that to providing the product service to third party users (i.e. use your content for other users of the service), but depends on business model (e.g. most social* businesses). C: A lot less common ToS to obtain a right to distribute user content in derived products. A number of sites have gotten into hot water with their userbase over trying to update their ToS from B to C. From memory... Adobe Cloud, DeviantArt, maybe some others? Typically this gets flak in creative communities, given that it is many people's business, and they're more concerned about distribution rights than your average coder. At its base, OpenAI/Microsoft/etc. will eventually run into the exact same issues that bedeviled the Linux kernel in the 1990s, except with a much thornier IP ownership question (given the greater number of parties).