Hot take
Time for another #hotTake - #github #copilot does not infringe GPL licenses. In any #copyleft #license you have permission to learn from that code, and you can use that learning elsewhere without having to respect the license.
#AI is just learning from these. Of course, if you force it by crafting an attack prompt, it is likely to give you a literal copy. But that should be hard, almost impossible in regular usage. And yet, we should wonder if copying a few lines infringes GPL.
Hot take
@deavid could the model the AI generated from the training data not be considered a derived work? And thus the output of the AI a derived work?
I also don't see an explicit grant in the GPL v2 or v3 for ' learning', what clause gives you this impression?
I genuinely think there will be some interesting test cases over AI and copyright. It won't be a short or pretty road.
Hot take
Should the developer of the algorithm be considered to have a right to the resultant work?
Should the rights holders of the training data set be considered to have a right to the resultant work?
Or should the 'artist' who combined them and generated the work?
I don't think there is an easy answer here.
But I do think it's too simplistic to say that the licences of the works used to train the AI model can be ignored, which seems to be Github's current stance.
Hot take
@intrbiz for me, it's the end user responsibility to use it fair. If the results are copying a lot and causes a legal issue, I don't think that GitHub would be claimed as responsible. It most probably would be claimed as end user fault.