411–420 of 1001 posts
I think it's important to realize the exact implications here: - MS absolutely has the authority to copy, use, and even train their models on your GPL-license code, because you agreed to let them do that when you signed their EULA when you decided to host your code on GitHub. - This authority does not extend to CoPilot users, who cannot republish your GPL-licensed code without respecting the license. But remember tha…
I think it's important to realize the exact implications here: - MS absolutely has the authority to copy, use, and even train their models on your GPL-license code, because you agreed to let them do that when you signed their EULA when you decided to host your code on GitHub. - This authority does not extend to CoPilot users, who cannot republish your GPL-licensed code without respecting the license. But remember tha…
I think it's important to realize the exact implications here: - MS absolutely has the authority to copy, use, and even train their models on your GPL-license code, because you agreed to let them do that when you signed their EULA when you decided to host your code on GitHub. - This authority does not extend to CoPilot users, who cannot republish your GPL-licensed code without respecting the license. But remember tha…
I think it's important to realize the exact implications here: - MS absolutely has the authority to copy, use, and even train their models on your GPL-license code, because you agreed to let them do that when you signed their EULA when you decided to host your code on GitHub. - This authority does not extend to CoPilot users, who cannot republish your GPL-licensed code without respecting the license. But remember tha…
> MS absolutely has the authority to copy, use, and even train their models on your GPL-license code, because you agreed to let them do that when you signed their EULA when you decided to host your code on GitHub. What about GPL code which you don't own, but post to Github, Like the gcc mirror repo?
you must have the right to publish the code you put on github.com, and by publishing to github.com, you assert that you have the rights to do so. you also grant GitHub the right to show that code to others, no matter what license your code is licensed under.
why does no one read the terms of service or license agreements? these questions are answered there and this "copilot is stealing" stuff won't even make it to court.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not supposed to be able to use dominance in one market (git hosting) to gain dominance in another (AI powered code suggestions).
You might be confused but that's literally what you do as a business. You leverage your domain area expertise to expand into new areas of business. For instance, Apple already knew about the portable hardware market and extended their reach into the portable music market via iPod. It used the iPod to reach the music marketplace via iTunes. Used its market dominance to create iPhone and the rest is history. Maybe that…
As you point out, establishing what dominance is in a market is a tricky thing and it is why governments will investigate any potential signs of it. Now, personally I don't think this is really an issue for Github, or microsoft (the parent company) but let's not pretend market dominance and abuse of dominant position are not a real things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Github does plenty of stuff that you can't do. e.g. the contributions graph as just one example that comes to mind. That's not unfair, and not the basis for a lawsuit, it's just business. > Copilot is not only making money off of open-source, they are making money off of open-source in a way others can't. Of course! That's why MS paid squillions to buy Github.
You're not supposed to be able to use dominance in one market (git hosting) to gain dominance in another (AI powered code suggestions).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Github does plenty of stuff that you can't do. e.g. the contributions graph as just one example that comes to mind. That's not unfair, and not the basis for a lawsuit, it's just business. > Copilot is not only making money off of open-source, they are making money off of open-source in a way others can't. Of course! That's why MS paid squillions to buy Github.
Its anticompetitive and illegal (if the government ever decides to start prosecuting people under those laws again).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Github does plenty of stuff that you can't do. e.g. the contributions graph as just one example that comes to mind. That's not unfair, and not the basis for a lawsuit, it's just business. > Copilot is not only making money off of open-source, they are making money off of open-source in a way others can't. Of course! That's why MS paid squillions to buy Github.
You're not supposed to be able to use dominance in one market (git hosting) to gain dominance in another (AI powered code suggestions).
I think it's important to realize the exact implications here: - MS absolutely has the authority to copy, use, and even train their models on your GPL-license code, because you agreed to let them do that when you signed their EULA when you decided to host your code on GitHub. - This authority does not extend to CoPilot users, who cannot republish your GPL-licensed code without respecting the license. But remember tha…