I've been wondering the same though found basically no discussion on this topic.

Let's ignore whether GPL or whatever license allows GitHub to do this - let the lawyers sort this out. Instead we should focus on whether it is possible to legally prevent such behavior via license.

In other words, where is my GPLv4 with anti-ml clause?

I personally hope that a new GPL would not be anti-ml. It's a very cool and interesting technology imo. I think a new GPL should be explicit and say that code produced my a machine learning algorithm is trained on GPLv4 code should remain under GPLv4 or a compatible license.

That would have the same effect, but is slightly nicer.

FSF and SFC and OSI if you're listening, this would be very nice.

I made a series of licenses that attempt to do that while still remaining within current legal bounds. https://yzena.com/licenses/

You can’t make a license that takes away fair use. The MPAA and RIAA would really love to be able to do that, but they can’t.

To the extent that training a model is fair use, it will always trump your license.

pretty sure I can license my code however I wish, and others may choose to, or not to, use it under my license. I literally OWN it! Watch this: "you may only use my code if you accept my cat Trixie (http://trixie.cat) as your lord and savior. All use of my code outside of such acceptance is prohibited and will be prosecuted as copyright infringement to the fullest extent of law."

> and others may choose to, or not to, use it under my license.

Fair use essentially means you can use the work without a license. As long as its ‘fair’. The license might literally say ‘no fair use’, but if you’re not abiding by the terms of the license it means nothing.

You can put anything in a license you want, but it doesn’t mean it will stand up in a court of law.