News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by dheera on Saturday July 03, 2021 @07:00PM (#27725697)
> then you'd want to forbid contributors from using CoPilot

I mean, if you used CoPilot on one computer, stared at it intensely for 1 hour, closed that computer, and then typed out code in the other computer that you were contributing from, you technically didn't use it for the contribution, you just used CoPilot for your education only.

Intellectual property is itself a flawed concept in many ways. It's like asking someone to do physics research but forbidding them from using anything that Einstein wrote.

Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by rvnx on Saturday July 03, 2021 @08:24PM (#27726210)
Intellectual property itself is silly. How can a thought be the property of someone ? Secrecy is the solution if you don't want others to learn from you (like Coca-Cola does).
Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by pbhjpbhj on Sunday July 04, 2021 @07:10AM (#27728811)
It's not a natural right, we supposedly do it too stimulate innovation by offering a reward and in order to get things into the public domain -- obviously Disney (and the politicians that kowtowed to them) ruined that for the World.

Patents should have reduced with product lifecycles, copyright should be a similar period; maybe 10-14 years.

My personal opinion.

Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by BlueTemplar on Saturday July 03, 2021 @08:50PM (#27726411)
That's just words for you... Intellectual property isn't property, at least not a full-blown one.

http://www.av8n.com/physics/weird-terminology.htm

Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by native_samples on Sunday July 04, 2021 @05:42AM (#27728420)
It's not silly, it's an evolved and pragmatic solution to the question of how society can incentivize creative work. More or less every society has developed some notion of IP and there's little appetite in wider society to debate it - the idea of abolishing IP laws is deeply fringe and only really surfaces in forums like this one.

Does it have flaws and can it be improved upon? Sure. I think society underweights what improvements to the patent system in particular could do. But such ideas are so niche they are hardly even written down, let alone debated at large. Society has bigger issues on its mind.

Like any evolved system IP law encounters new challenges over time and will be expected to evolve again, which it will surely do. A simple fix for Copilot is surely to just exclude all non-Apache2/BSD/MIT licensed code. Although there might technically still be advertising clause related issues, in practice hardly anyone cares enough to go to court over that.

Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by dragonwriter on Saturday July 03, 2021 @08:27PM (#27726225)
> Intellectual property itself is silly. How can a thought be the property of someone ?

No category of intellectual property covers thoughts, so the question has no relevance to the preceding statement.

Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by CRConrad on Sunday July 04, 2021 @06:37AM (#27728638)
An equally valid, AFAICS, way of looking at it is that "intellectual property" covers nothing but thoughts, only expressed in different forms.
Re:I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as t... by pbhjpbhj on Sunday July 04, 2021 @07:06AM (#27728792)
If you read the video with a view to reproducing it then you created a derivative work, ie copyright infringement.

If you just used it for inspiration, that's fine; if the way it was coded is a result of technical constraints, that's fine too; if the code is generic it's not distinctive enough to acquire copyright in the first place.