An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
katedowninglaw.com
An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
1–10 of 182 posts
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#2I think copyright itself might be on its way out. What meaning does a copyright have when I can click "Variations" on anything and get 4 suggestions in 10 seconds? Imagine how good they will be by 2030.
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#3out of curiosity, would anybody else cease to have an issue copilot if it was an open source model?
i'm not paying for copilot right now because i'm waiting for this to shake out. but i'd be happy to pay (even their current asking price) if i knew the model was also open source and could be self hosted.
maybe this is the wrong way to ask the question, but hopefully it makes sense
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#4I think copyright itself might be on its way out. What meaning does a copyright have when I can click "Variations" on anything and get 4 suggestions in 10 seconds? Imagine how good they will be by 2030.
there's a great youtube doc about everything being remixing which i highly recommend
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#5I think copyright itself might be on its way out. What meaning does a copyright have when I can click "Variations" on anything and get 4 suggestions in 10 seconds? Imagine how good they will be by 2030.
Have you tried that on any kind of music?
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#6out of curiosity, would anybody else cease to have an issue copilot if it was an open source model? i'm not paying for copilot right now because i'm waiting for this to shake out. but i'd be happy to pay (even their current asking price) if i knew the model was also open source and could be self hosted. maybe this is the wrong way to ask the question, but hopefully it makes sense
If it was GPL it could use GPL code and legally there would be no debate.
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#7out of curiosity, would anybody else cease to have an issue copilot if it was an open source model? i'm not paying for copilot right now because i'm waiting for this to shake out. but i'd be happy to pay (even their current asking price) if i knew the model was also open source and could be self hosted. maybe this is the wrong way to ask the question, but hopefully it makes sense
If it was GPL it could use GPL code and legally there would be no debate.
[deleted]
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#8I think copyright itself might be on its way out. What meaning does a copyright have when I can click "Variations" on anything and get 4 suggestions in 10 seconds? Imagine how good they will be by 2030.
Copyright becomes especially important and valuable in these circumstances. Remember, original works is how your variation suggestion engine is trained. With remaining incentives taken away there is no more new stuff to train on, networks get trained on own output, the snake eats own tail.
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#9out of curiosity, would anybody else cease to have an issue copilot if it was an open source model? i'm not paying for copilot right now because i'm waiting for this to shake out. but i'd be happy to pay (even their current asking price) if i knew the model was also open source and could be self hosted. maybe this is the wrong way to ask the question, but hopefully it makes sense
If it was a true OSS project, first it would not clearly benefit a single near-monopoly by using my code (as in, that wouldn't be its purpose), and second I'm sure its contributors would be well placed to understand the issue and from the start bake in a reliable, transparent mechanism for opting out.
As is, it's EEE applied to open source-- Microsoft's ultimate play against the ethic that brought us Linux among other things. When your brainchild gets gobbled up faster than you can blink, pushed to people who never learn about your existence, and a megacorp that you are ethically opposed to profits from the process, the need for self-actualization is no longer addressed. The fundamental incentive that pushes us to publish in the open, to have other humans acknowledge you and your work and feel pride in it, is being eliminated.
Re: An open source lawyer’s view on the copilot class action lawsuit
#10Hmmm. I'm interested in the GitHub ToS, which (if I understand correctly) basically says that GitHub and it's affiliates (MS) can use anything you post on GitHub to improve their service.
What if I build an AGPL licenced service, using GitHub to coordinate development. According to the ToS MS could offer a version my service because I posted the code on GitHub, and they are using it to improve their service to me. According to my AGPL licence, they would need to share their source.
So which takes precedence. The licence or the ToS?