News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Copilot sells code other people wrote by grayfaced on Thursday June 23, 2022 @09:03AM (#31848477)
Or alternately, "I sometimes listen to other people's songs and use those ideas to develop my own. In fact sometimes I copy and paste short melodies and then rework them."

Courts have held that it doesn't apply to music, why do you think different rules apply to code?

Re:Copilot sells code other people wrote by zarzavat on Thursday June 23, 2022 @11:36PM (#31857520)
Courts are definitely aware of the need to protect the creative process and that no song is truly “original” in all aspects. e.g. the Katy Perry case[0]

Songs are different from code, in that the “hook” that makes the money may be only a few seconds long. There are many creative choices that a songwriter/producer can fit into just a few seconds: the harmony, melody, rhythm, lyrics, timbre, effects, ...

Whereas for code, the space of creativity is limited by functional considerations. A creative choice is protected by copyright but not all choices that programmers make are creative. Often the choices are limited by the API/interface or by efficiency considerations and it turns out that there’s only one good way to do something.

A function may be very intricate, yes, while still containing almost no creative value (e.g. a Vulkan setup function). Music doesn’t have an equivalent to this - the placement of every note is a creative act.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_v._Perry