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

51–60 of 824 posts

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#51

Post by arpowers »

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.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#53

Post by jmcphers »

ISL wrote: post #29

Can anyone with Copilot access give a short summary of its response to the prompts: function force=Gmmr2Array(mass1, mass2) and function [force, torque]=pointMatrixGravity(array1,array2) ? I'd love to know if some of my GPL v3 code [1, 2] has landed in the training set [1] https://github.com/4kbt/NewtonianEotWashToolkit/blob/master/... [2] https://github.com/4kbt/NewtonianEotWashToolkit/blob/master/...

First prompt:

    var G = 6.67e-11;
    var force = G * mass1 * mass2 / distance * distance;
    return force;
Second prompt:

  % pointMatrixGravity - Calculates the gravitational force and torque on a
  % point mass due to a matrix of point masses.
  % 
  %   [force, torque]=pointMatrixGravity(array1,array2)
  % 
  %   Inputs:
  %       array1 - 3xN array of point masses
  %       array2 - 3xN array of point masses
  %   Outputs:
  %       force - 3x1 array of gravitational force
  %       torque - 3x1 array of gravitational torque
  % 
  %   Author: David J. R. MacKay,
  %   email:

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#54

Post by warbler73 »

It seems obvious that AI models are derivative works of the works they are trained on but it also seems obvious that it is totally legally untested whether they are derivative works in the formal legal sense of copyright law. So it should be a good case assuming we have wise and enlightened judges who understand all nuances and can guide us into the future.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#55

Post by heavyset_go »

dmitrygr wrote: post #4
naillo wrote: post #3

I'm kinda sceptical that this goes anywhere given that basically they say that whatever copilot outputs is your responsibility to vet that it doesn't break any copyright (obviously that goes against the promise of it and the PR but that's the small print that gets them out of trouble).

So, if i made napster 2.0 and said that it is your job to make sure that you do not download anything copyrighted, that would be ok?

This is a bad analogy because P2P networks exist that are legal to operate, because Section 230 of the CDA prevents interactive computer services from being held responsible for user generated content.

What made Napster illegal is that the company did not create their network for fair use of content, but to explicitly violate copyright for profit.

Copilot is like Napster in this case, in that both services launder copyrighted data and distributed it to users for profit.

Copilot is not like other P2P networks that exist to share data that is either free to distribute or can be used under the fair use doctrine. Copilot explicitly takes copyrighted content and distributes it to users in violation of licenses, that's its explicit purpose.

It's entirely possible to make a Copilot-like product that was trained on data that doesn't have restrictive licensing in the same way it's entirely possible to create a P2P network for sharing files that you have the right to share legally.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#56

Post by sedatk »

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.

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#58

Post by williamcotton »

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…

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 company to write and publish an isEven function then no one else can legally use it?

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#59

Post by herpderperator »

The title of the submitted PDF document: "Microsoft Word - 2022-11-02 Copilot Complaint (near final)"[0]

I've noticed this a lot and it's quite funny seeing what the actual filename of the document was. Does this just get included as metadata by default when you export to PDF?

[0] https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/pdf/1-0-github_complaint...

Re: We've filed a lawsuit against GitHub Copilot

#60

Post by Barrin92 »

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.

No it isn't, at least not automatically which is why infringement of licenses exists at all, the fact that you have a brain doesn't change that and never has. If you reproduce someone's code you can be in hot water, and that should be the case for an operator of a machine.

It's also why the concept of a clean room implementation exists at all.

Post reply on HN