The issue would be approached much differently if, for example, a “video llm” was created that scraped movies and generated content from those sources. The well organized, well connected movie industry would be up in arms burying ai companies with lawsuits and newly passed legal protections.
GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
111–120 of 156 posts
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The core is always the user and what they need." Which is why gnu/linux without a terminal is totally usable and therefore accesible to the non programmer. /s I agree that user centric developement should be the goal, but I hardly see it implemented. Free software programmers almost allways solved their own needs first, which is alright, because usually no one paid them to serve other peoples needs, but I seldom see…
> Which is why gnu/linux without a terminal is totally usable and therefore accesible to the non programmer. /s Have you used modern Fedora? I have an old Thinkpad at home that I put Fedora on last year as our "sofa" laptop for web shopping etc. I took careful note of what I needed to do to set it up and that involved nothing on the command line to get to something good that my wife could happily use (not a techie, n…
Yea, the parent poster starts with a false premise. There are many Linux distros these days that laypeople can and do easily use: Ubuntu, Mint, PopOS, just to name a few.
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#113[deleted]
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL but searched a lot on this, this is very tricky subject legally. To simplify: - imagine all code Copilot trained on is GPL licensed. - we have a universal function `isInfringing(code)` that has access to all GPL code, and returns `true` if it is infringing some GPL code. for a given prompt; if `isInfringing(copilot(prompt))==false` we cannot claim copilot infringing on GPL code, even it is trained on GPLed code…
If one was sufficiently inspired by code A when writing code B, then it is a derivate work. This is a core tenet of copyright law. At what measure is one sufficiently inspired for it to be a derivate work? That is up to courts to decide.
yeah the problem here is there is no 'code A' usually, it is more like: 1000s of GPLed code (A1, A2, ... An )
Technically when you get a piece from each, there is no infringement legally. ( as they have all different copyright holders )
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#115(2021)
Some discussion then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27736650
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#116(2021) Some discussion then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27736650
What's new since?
Microsoft will assume liability for legal copyright risks of Copilot
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37420885
This week:
Judge dismisses DMCA copyright claim in GitHub Copilot suit
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
He works for GitHub and has probably never written anything in his life: https://okfn.de/en/vorstand/
He started at GitHub 3 years after the article was written. Don't think GitHub's interview process takes that long. ;)
GitHub was just the logical progression from okfn:
https://blog.okfn.org/2022/03/03/microsoft-to-support-open-d...
Today, we are pleased to announce that Microsoft will once again be supporting Open Data Day by providing mini-grants to organisations to help them run events, the call will launch on Open Data Day 2022.
They also supported "Open Data Day 2021". Sounds like a nice trojan horse to influence EU legislation through purported activists.
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#118This is missing the largest argument in my opinion. The weights are the derivative work of the GPL licensed code and should therefore be released under the GPL. I would say these companies release their weights or simply not train on copyleft code. It is truly amazing how many people will shill for these massive corporations that claim they love open source or that their AI is open while they profit off of the violat…
I think it's amazing that licenses are ignored to train a model, but companies then try to impose a license on the use of the same model. It would be nice if there there was a training BOM that came with a model. And if not included, all rights to control the use of a model were forfeit.
> I think it's amazing that licenses are ignored to train a model, but companies then try to impose a license on the use of the same model.
There's existing analogies like encyclopedias and dictionaries.
One interesting aspect to those sorts of consolidation works is that they may contain errors and other artifacts, specifically to identify duplications of their work vs new from-scratch work.
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's amazing that licenses are ignored to train a model, but companies then try to impose a license on the use of the same model. It would be nice if there there was a training BOM that came with a model. And if not included, all rights to control the use of a model were forfeit.
> I think it's amazing that licenses are ignored to train a model, but companies then try to impose a license on the use of the same model. There's existing analogies like encyclopedias and dictionaries. One interesting aspect to those sorts of consolidation works is that they may contain errors and other artifacts, specifically to identify duplications of their work vs new from-scratch work.
I don't think those are good analogies. An encyclopedia contains references or summaries of a concept or idea, but not a compressed volume of all possible text. A closer analogy would be an unauthorized "collected works" of your favorite HN commenter packaged up and resold.
It also feels similar to the recent article posted about photography and how during its early days pictures were used for advertising without the consent of those photographed. [0]
[0] https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-troubled-development-o...
Re: GitHub Copilot is not infringing your copyright (2021)
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, let's put it like this. I did study IT and even I struggle at times. Or quite often, if I want to do something new. And I absolutey would have no idea, how to do anything serious, without the terminal. But a terminal is programming. So yeah, even a newb can learn to paste some commands quite quickly - but troubleshooting even trivial things, gets you into highly technical stuff very quickly. Do you consider man…
So your issue is that someone who solved their problem didn't solve it in a way that you want or expect? Why does your opinion about their problem matter at all? Why does it matter to the person who makes their solution available that the common people won't? Using the terminal is not "programming". Non-programmers can use the terminal for many non-programming tasks. Imagemagick and netpbm-progs require no knowledge…
"The only difference from GIMP or Photoshop is that the UI/UX has a different efficiency metric (mainly because interactive image manipulation is more efficient when you are interacting visually). But the operations are just as discoverable"
I know. Which is why the year of the linux desktop was such a success.
"Why does it matter to the person who makes their solution available that the common people won't?"
They have all the right not to care, but it still is not helping the goal of being useful for normal people.