Copilot sells code other people wrote • Hacker News Board

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#691

Post by alar44 » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 7:58 PM UTC

sirsinsalot wrote: post #661

marpstar wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Copy my MIT licensed code without attribution? I don't give a shit, go ahead, I hope it helps This is my feeling as well. I don't build stuff in the open so that I can get bent out of shape at someone not properly licensing it. It's in a public repository, FFS... I assume that if anyone even notices my repo, that they may copy/paste a few lines out of my solution if it helps them.

But this isn't everyone's feeling. And they have a right to choose how their work is used. Thats the basis of commerce being possible here. The mechanised license ignorance and the way original authors are not compensated is the issue. If you had a repo you'd worked really hard on, and offered a commercial license or GPL depending on the use (so you can be funded to work on it) ... do you think it is fair that copilo…

Saying an auto complete of a line of code is "using their work" is a massive stretch.

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#692

Post by Kbelicius » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 7:58 PM UTC

Guid_NewGuid wrote: post #678

monocasa wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that whether the free software people want it or not, the copyright system over code exists, and historically has been used as a cudgel against smaller players. If we got rid of copyright over code entirely I'd totally be down for this. And IIRC RMS has said the same thing; that he'd be in favor of the removal of copyright over code as a concept even if it meant neutering the protections of the GPL. Unti…

Interesting that he's said that, I wasn't aware. I think at its root the problem is copyleft is a mirror image of copyright. It relies on and replicates all the cultural and legal requirements and constraints of the copyright model and curtails an imagining of other possibilities. Every sentence or thought spent on copyleft is misdirected in my view. Which is why I find Microsoft doing this (potential) en-masse licen…

>I think at its root the problem is copyleft is a mirror image of copyright.

That is the (only)point of copyleft. If it weren't for copyright it wouldn't exist. Fight fire with fire, that sort of thing.

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#693

Post by Sakos » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 7:59 PM UTC

Xunjin wrote: post #329

Sakos wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I share my code without a license because I want others to be able to see how I solved things. However, this doesn't mean I'm okay with wholesale copying my code. If it's some random guy, then whatever. If it's a corporation like Microsoft, then yeah, I have a problem with it. Under German law, the code is legally not allowed to be reproduced or used without explicit permission even if it doesn't have a license. I re…

Well, it depends on where you post it, right? Because if you are using a GitHub which probably is US based, you follow the laws related to US?! Demanding that the law of a country should be followed by another is totally no sense. They can agree, make agreements about it, and even take legal action to the Highest court, so it could be evaluated, but using your nationality as an argument of what you can do, it's just…

https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/

I always find it weird how people respond to my comments. Why didn't you check what the US law is like for source code? A lot of places have similar laws around source code, primarily in the West because of efforts to normalise laws across countries, driven by US efforts. And other countries? Well, it's the same for any kind of IP. Either the country has strong IP law and you have the resources to pursue an issue or not and you can't do anything about it.

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#694

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 8:04 PM UTC

ellyagg wrote: post #683

nickjj wrote: post #535

This might be overreacting but is there a way to opt-out of Copilot using your code in open source repos? It feels morally wrong to me that I can spend thousands of hours working on projects on my own free will but then a company can sell the code I wrote to others in the form of snippet completion as a service. In fact they end up selling your code back to yourself if you plan to use the service. If the answer is no…

Well, I hope your viewpoint doesn't win the day, because making code as freely shareable and remixable as possible is a huge boon for humanity.

[deleted]

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#695

Post by acuozzo » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 8:08 PM UTC

This is, in part, why I will continue to use the original 4-clause BSD license for the code I write.

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#696

Post by pvaldes » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 8:10 PM UTC

Each day sounding more as Zopilote, it seems.

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#697

Post by acuozzo » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 8:11 PM UTC

brianmcc wrote: post #635

borishn wrote: post #602

Copilot is fair use, get over it! Copilot is not writing your code any more that Google search is writing your code. You are writing your code, and Copilot is just making suggestions. US constitution secures limited copyright to "To promote the progress of science and useful arts". Copilot is just that, get over it!

Wait till it suggests something Disney can argue they own rights to...

LucasFilm → Pixar → Disney. I wonder if the mouse owns Duff's Device…

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#698

Post by jonny_eh » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 8:12 PM UTC

widjit wrote: post #690

jonny_eh wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you want a new license that just prohibits use by one company for one purpose.

is there something wrong with that?

Not at all, you can put any license on your code that you want.

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#699

Post by matheusmoreira » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 8:13 PM UTC

monocasa wrote: post #630

Guid_NewGuid wrote: post #569

I find this whole topic very annoying, this is like the 3rd variation to reach the front page today. But it has made me realize why I instinctively dislike Free Software as a movement. Copyright and licensing are bad, actually. Stop getting worked up about the idea of using courts to punish theft. Stop getting into a frenzy of arousal about the police kicking down doors to drag Billy Gates to jail because 80 characte…

The issue is that whether the free software people want it or not, the copyright system over code exists, and historically has been used as a cudgel against smaller players. If we got rid of copyright over code entirely I'd totally be down for this. And IIRC RMS has said the same thing; that he'd be in favor of the removal of copyright over code as a concept even if it meant neutering the protections of the GPL. Unti…

> And IIRC RMS has said the same thing; that he'd be in favor of the removal of copyright over code as a concept even if it meant neutering the protections of the GPL.

Do you have a citation? I was under the impression he defended copyright because copyleft depends on it.

Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote

#700

Post by colejohnson66 » Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 8:17 PM UTC

worker_person wrote: post #650

colejohnson66 wrote: post #618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owning stock, on its own, is not the same as buying a company

If you own a controlling percentage. Then yes it is. That is how you buy/control a publicly traded company. You can buy 100% of shares and take it private, but that's overkill for what Microsoft wanted.

Hence why I said “on its own”