GPLed code on github (given the copilot controversy)

[jahoti]

On 7/12/21 9:16 PM, marc wrote:
> Hi, me again
> 
> So I am going to respond to multiple comments in one go:
> 
> I had a look at Julia Reda's post, and as far as I can
> make out, she only focuses on the fact that individual
> snippets are very short - but doesn't make any mention that
> inserting *lots* snippets algorithmically is *all* that
> copilot does...

Repermutating lots of snippets is not in itself copyright infringement, 
however- otherwise everything written in English would infringe on the 
copyright of dictionary publishers! That's not to say what copilot 
produces isn't a derivative work; you give a good argument to support 
the contrary. It just fails to follow straightforwardly from the fact 
that copilot produces "remixes" of existing code.

> Another commenter said that the codebase used to generate
> the model is just somehow the "input" and not actually *in*
> model - but I am not sure the distinction is that clear.

You would be correct to wonder- if you're referring to my comment, I 
apologize for what was a warped and unclear explanation of a warped and 
unclear point. The intended argument was that copilot never executes or 
distributes compiled copies of the input (or the model derived from it) 
as *software* or part of any software, and therefore does not trigger 
the requirement of sharing under the (A/L/)GPL.

However, after further consideration, the requirement to include a 
license notice would pose a problem- and more generally, omitting or 
erring on the license notices of copilot's output could become a nightmare.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20210713/d32599c7/attachment.sig>