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

We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

githubcopilotlitigation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 824 posts

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#101

Post by tptacek »

m00x wrote: post #64
bugfix-66 wrote: post #28

Ask HN: I want to modify the BSD 2-Clause Open Source License to explicitly prohibit the use of the licensed software in training systems like Microsoft's Copilot (and use during inference). How should the third clause be worded? The No-AI 3-Clause Open Source Software License Copyright (C) All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided tha…

Get a lawyer since this is nonsense.

Is it? A similarly casual clause in the OCB license prevented OCB from being used by the military for many years (granted, it prevented OCB from being used almost everywhere else, too).

I have no idea if this license language works or doesn't, but this is hardly the least productive subthread on this story. It's concrete and specific, and we can learn stuff from it.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#102

Post by kmeisthax »

IceWreck wrote: post #34

I am not against this lawsuit but I'm against the implications of this because it can lead to disastrous laws. A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it. Thats fair use. If a machine does it, is it wrong ? What is the line between copying and machine learning ? Where does overfitting come in ? Today they're filing a lawsuit against copilot. Tomorrow it will be against stable diffusio…

Wine/Proton are safe because there is controlling 9th and SCOTUS precedent in favor of reimplementation of APIs.

The reason why those wouldn't apply to Copilot is because they aren't separating out APIs from implementation and just implementing what they need for the goal of compatibility or "programmer convenience". AI takes the whole work and shreds it in a blender in the hopes of creating something new. The hope of the AI community is that the fair use argument is more like Authors Guild v. Google rather than Sony v. Connectix.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#103

Post by m00x »

bugfix-66 wrote: post #77
m00x wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get a lawyer since this is nonsense.

It's literally the standard BSD 2-Clause License, word for word, with an additional third clause: 3. Use in source or binary forms for the construction or operation of predictive software generation systems is prohibited. Hardly nonsense, but obviously you aren't equipped to judge. More about the BSD licenses: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses

Yes, that added clause is nonsense. On top of being nonsense, there is significant precedent.

Remember the lawsuit of HiQ labs vs LinkedIn? Scraping, or viewing public data on a public webpage is legal.

https://gizmodo.com/linkedin-scraping-data-legal-court-case-...

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#104

Post by __alexs »

sedatk wrote: post #56
IceWreck wrote: post #34

I am not against this lawsuit but I'm against the implications of this because it can lead to disastrous laws. A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it. Thats fair use. If a machine does it, is it wrong ? What is the line between copying and machine learning ? Where does overfitting come in ? Today they're filing a lawsuit against copilot. Tomorrow it will be against stable diffusio…

> A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it Actually, we were forbidden to look at open source code at Microsoft (circa 2009) because it might influence our coding and violate licenses.

Do the TypeScript team code with their eyes closed?

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#105

Post by counttheforks »

Imnimo wrote: post #47

On page 18, they show Copilot produces the following code: >function isEven(n) { > return n % 2 === 0; >} They then say, "Copilot’s Output, like Codex’s, is derived from existing code. Namely, sample code that appears in the online book Mastering JS, written by Valeri Karpov." Surely everyone reading this has written that code verbatim at some point in their lives. How can they assert that this code is derived specif…

I wrote that exact function the other day, and I've never even heard of that book.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#106

Post by bawolff »

eurasiantiger wrote: post #94
williamcotton wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no way in hell that isEven is covered by copyright. "In computer programs, concerns for efficiency may limit the possible ways to achieve a particular function, making a particular expression necessary to achieving the idea. In this case, the expression is not protected by copyright." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Compari... Think about how absurd this is. So if Microsoft was the first…

Does that mean any perfectly optimal function is copyright-free?

Any function devoid of "creativity" is. No choices equal no creativity.

As a note the same applies to logos. Very simple logos that are only some lines and shapes, do not have copyright (in usa)

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#107

Post by josho »

elil17 wrote: post #67
sedatk wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it Actually, we were forbidden to look at open source code at Microsoft (circa 2009) because it might influence our coding and violate licenses.

That demonstrates that copyright laws are already stifling innovation.

I don’t quite agree. Msft took a conservative approach to copyright to protect their own business.

Meanwhile open source software has had an immeasurable benefit to society. My computer, tv, phone, light bulb, etc all benefit from OSS—running various licenses, and only a subset using a copyleft like license.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#108

Post by cromka »

IceWreck wrote: post #34

I am not against this lawsuit but I'm against the implications of this because it can lead to disastrous laws. A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it. Thats fair use. If a machine does it, is it wrong ? What is the line between copying and machine learning ? Where does overfitting come in ? Today they're filing a lawsuit against copilot. Tomorrow it will be against stable diffusio…

> A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it. Thats fair use. If a machine does it

Quite sure the issue at hand is about the code being copied verbatim without the license terms, not "learning" from it.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#109

Post by grayfaced »

arpowers wrote: post #51
IceWreck wrote: post #34

I am not against this lawsuit but I'm against the implications of this because it can lead to disastrous laws. A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it. Thats fair use. If a machine does it, is it wrong ? What is the line between copying and machine learning ? Where does overfitting come in ? Today they're filing a lawsuit against copilot. Tomorrow it will be against stable diffusio…

In some ways all these AIs are plagiarizing... I think creators should opt-in to ai models, as no current license was developed with this in mind.

Maybe its time for Creative Commons License to address this. I'm curious if No-Derivative would already prohibit this? Does the ND language need tweaking? Or do they need a whole new clause.

Edit: I guess they do address it in their faq and I'd summarize it "Depends if copyright law applies and depends if it's considered derivative". https://creativecommons.org/faq/#artificial-intelligence-and...

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#110

Post by [deleted] »

IceWreck wrote: post #34

I am not against this lawsuit but I'm against the implications of this because it can lead to disastrous laws. A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it. Thats fair use. If a machine does it, is it wrong ? What is the line between copying and machine learning ? Where does overfitting come in ? Today they're filing a lawsuit against copilot. Tomorrow it will be against stable diffusio…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN