Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 212 posts

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#11

Post by chartreusek »

iliekcomputers wrote: post #3

If you open-sourced code and allowed it to be used for commercial purposes, I don't see the point of being pissy about Github using it, I'm saying this as someone who's written quite a lot of MIT code. (And charging for a product which adds value to your developer experience and needs money to be run is not a bad thing)

Sure, but there's still the license at play here. It's not like they trained it only on public domain/CC0 code. What happens when it verbatim outputs a significant amount of code that was originally MIT, or BSD, or GPL licensed without the appropriate attribution. It can create unintended copyright violations and potentially open people using it up to liability.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#12

Post by SamWhited »

gdsdfe wrote: post #2

Nothing is free people! ... People are outraged by GitHub but nobody is going after Facebook or Google for training their AIs on your personal data. Facebook used your face to train some algos, google your personal emails etc.

It's not about it being free, it's about GitHub taking something you licensed with conditions (ie. attribution or keep this copyright notice and license file, etc.) and blatantly ignoring your license because they know you probably can't afford to sue them for copyright infringement. Open Source doesn't mean you can reproduce and copy the code freely, licenses exist for a reason. Also: of course people care about Facebook et al. (not enough, I'll grant you). Plenty of people complain about Facebook violating privacy every single day.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#13

Post by seph-reed »

iliekcomputers wrote: post #3

If you open-sourced code and allowed it to be used for commercial purposes, I don't see the point of being pissy about Github using it, I'm saying this as someone who's written quite a lot of MIT code. (And charging for a product which adds value to your developer experience and needs money to be run is not a bad thing)

Frankly, I think the reason people are upset is because a tool that once revolved around sharing work with others has been bought by a super giant corporation and then all of that sharing is being turned into a means of putting the people who shared out of work. Or in the very least, cutting their salaries dramatically.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#14

Post by toomuchtodo »

chartreusek wrote: post #11
iliekcomputers wrote: post #3

If you open-sourced code and allowed it to be used for commercial purposes, I don't see the point of being pissy about Github using it, I'm saying this as someone who's written quite a lot of MIT code. (And charging for a product which adds value to your developer experience and needs money to be run is not a bad thing)

Sure, but there's still the license at play here. It's not like they trained it only on public domain/CC0 code. What happens when it verbatim outputs a significant amount of code that was originally MIT, or BSD, or GPL licensed without the appropriate attribution. It can create unintended copyright violations and potentially open people using it up to liability.

So sue them and a court opinion can demonstrate where the line is and how much code can be replicated before attribution is required (and the product can be refined to ensure compliance).

Innovation should push boundaries.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#15

Post by hmfrh »

iliekcomputers wrote: post #3

If you open-sourced code and allowed it to be used for commercial purposes, I don't see the point of being pissy about Github using it, I'm saying this as someone who's written quite a lot of MIT code. (And charging for a product which adds value to your developer experience and needs money to be run is not a bad thing)

> If you open-sourced code and allowed it to be used for commercial purposes

Uploading it to Github does not transfer ownership or imply allowances for any use. If you upload it without a license it is a copyright violation to copy the code. Even with an MIT license it is a copyright violation to copy the code without attribution.

> I don't see the point of being pissy about Github using it, I'm saying this as someone who's written quite a lot of MIT code.

People are probably angry because this is yet another case of a big multinational corporation abusing unclear or difficult to enforce legislation for profit.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#16

Post by detaro »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #14
chartreusek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but there's still the license at play here. It's not like they trained it only on public domain/CC0 code. What happens when it verbatim outputs a significant amount of code that was originally MIT, or BSD, or GPL licensed without the appropriate attribution. It can create unintended copyright violations and potentially open people using it up to liability.

So sue them and a court opinion can demonstrate where the line is and how much code can be replicated before attribution is required (and the product can be refined to ensure compliance). Innovation should push boundaries.

They could push boundaries and publish one trained on all of Microsofts internal source code. Would for me be a great demonstration that they believe the "it's fair use and not violating copyright on the training data" argument.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#17

Post by matsemann »

iliekcomputers wrote: post #3

If you open-sourced code and allowed it to be used for commercial purposes, I don't see the point of being pissy about Github using it, I'm saying this as someone who's written quite a lot of MIT code. (And charging for a product which adds value to your developer experience and needs money to be run is not a bad thing)

> If you..

But we didn't.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#18

Post by dopaminefasting »

SamWhited wrote: post #6
iliekcomputers wrote: post #3

If you open-sourced code and allowed it to be used for commercial purposes, I don't see the point of being pissy about Github using it, I'm saying this as someone who's written quite a lot of MIT code. (And charging for a product which adds value to your developer experience and needs money to be run is not a bad thing)

If you write MIT code you expect them not to strip your license out in derivative works. This is exactly what license are for and GitHub is blatantly violating it while people applaud.

Maybe read the MIT license before you grab the pitchforks:

"The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all COPIES OR SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS of the Software."

Reusing a snippet doesn't require reproducing the MIT license. People who publish MIT software know they're basically giving their code out with basically no strings attached.

However, GitHub should be careful with the GPL variety.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#19

Post by code_duck »

gdsdfe wrote: post #2

Nothing is free people! ... People are outraged by GitHub but nobody is going after Facebook or Google for training their AIs on your personal data. Facebook used your face to train some algos, google your personal emails etc.

I wish that I could somehow turn my personal data into IP, but I’m not sure how to accomplish that.

Re: GitHub scraped your code. And they plan to charge you

#20

Post by lc9er »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #14
chartreusek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but there's still the license at play here. It's not like they trained it only on public domain/CC0 code. What happens when it verbatim outputs a significant amount of code that was originally MIT, or BSD, or GPL licensed without the appropriate attribution. It can create unintended copyright violations and potentially open people using it up to liability.

So sue them and a court opinion can demonstrate where the line is and how much code can be replicated before attribution is required (and the product can be refined to ensure compliance). Innovation should push boundaries.

Are you equipped to fight a protracted legal battle with Microsoft? Neither is anyone else.
Post reply on HN