News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on GitHub Copi­lot inves­ti­ga­tion. Parent comment

Re:GitHub Copi­lot inves­ti­ga­tion by Spivak on Monday October 17, 2022 @07:27PM (#33240919)
> If they re-released Copilot as FOSS, a lot of the valid criticisms would evaporate.

That changes nothing at all. A FOSS license is, in a legal sense, no different then a proprietary one. If it’s illegal it’s illegal regardless of whether it’s FOSS.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:GitHub Copi­lot inves­ti­ga­tion by rockemsockem on Monday October 17, 2022 @07:32PM (#33240971)
I mean, legally, yes, but the point at issue was public outcry, which has almost nothing to do with laws.

If Copilot was FOSS there'd probably be a few absolutists complaining, but they'd be mostly ignored.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:GitHub Copi­lot inves­ti­ga­tion by btdmaster on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @04:03AM (#33244339)
If Copilot is deemed a derivative work of its inputs, it would resolve the issue that it does not comply with the AGPL because it currently does not provide source code to its users under an AGPL-compliant license.
[ Parent | on HN ]