|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Why is Copilot so bad?

Why is Copilot so bad?

Posted Jul 5, 2022 11:52 UTC (Tue) by SLi (subscriber, #53131)
In reply to: Why is Copilot so bad? by farnz
Parent article: Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Yeah, I'm not sure there are lots of people who both understand something about the law and would be willing to declare that it's clear cut either way. I definitely am not. My gut feeling is that it will be deemed legal, possibly with some minor changes or post-processing, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.

My more important point is that it *should* be legal, as a matter of sane policy that also would be the result that benefits free software, just like most pushback against copyright maximalism.


to post comments

Why is Copilot so bad?

Posted Jul 5, 2022 15:26 UTC (Tue) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link] (1 responses)

I disagree that it should be legal - taking that position to an absurd extreme, if I train an ML model on Linux kernel versions alone, I could have an ML model that's cost me a few million dollars but that outputs proprietary kernels that are Linux-compatible and work on the hardware I care about. Effectively, copyright becomes non-existent for big companies who can afford to do this.

My position therefore depends strongly on what the tool actually outputs; if the snippets are such that they are not protected by copyright in their own right, and the tool only outputs unprotected snippets, then I'm OK with it; this probably needs some filtering on the output of the tool to remove known infringing snippets, which I'm also fine with ensuring is legal (it should not be infringement to include content purely for the purpose of ensuring that that content is not output by the tool - fair use sort of argument).

I also very strongly believe that the model itself should not be copyright infringement in and of itself - it's the output that may or may not be infringing, depending on how you use it, and it's the user of the model who infringes if they use infringing output from the model. That may sound like splitting hairs, but it means that Copilot and similar systems are fine, legally speaking, as are any other models trained from publicly available data. It's only the use you put them to that needs care - you could end up infringing by using a tool that is capable of outputting protected material, and it's on the tool user to watch for that and not accept infringing outputs from their tools.

Why is Copilot so bad?

Posted Jul 5, 2022 17:37 UTC (Tue) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454) [Link]

> I also very strongly believe that the model itself should not be copyright infringement in and of itself - it's the output that may or may not be infringing, depending on how you use it, and it's the user of the model who infringes if they use infringing output from the model. That may sound like splitting hairs, but it means that Copilot and similar systems are fine, legally speaking, as are any other models trained from publicly available data.

I suspect that would very much depend if someone manages to find a business model where a model, trained on someone else’s copyrighted production, makes a lot on money on its own (not via the output of original work copycats). People and lawmakers tend to take a dim view on someone making a lot of money from other people’s belongings without those getting a cut.

I doubt, for example, that the pharmaceutical companies will manage to escape forever paying back the countries whose fauna/flora they sampled to create medicines. The pressure will only grow with climate change and such natural products becoming harder to preserve.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds