GitHub, Microsoft, OpenAI fail to wriggle out of Copilot copyright lawsuit

https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/12/github_microsoft_openai_copilot/

by Dotnaught • 3 years ago

38 11 3 years ago

theregister.com

ranguna• 3 years ago

Can't wait to see the end result of all of this.

blibble2• 3 years ago

I am hoping $150,000 per copyright infringement

which then renders github insolvent

manfre• 3 years ago

I'm assuming you view that as a good thing for open source projects. Without a large, free platform like GitHub, many open source projects would not exist.

There are other source hosting options, but people don't want to host their own, pay to host their project, email patches, or create an account for every project.

jacooper• 3 years ago

This will affect the entire AI world, if Microsoft loses, training on copyrighted materials will be illegal.

belorn2• 3 years ago

"The judge however said that assuming the facts of the complaint are true, it's reasonable to "infer that, should plaintiffs’ code be reproduced as output, it will be reproduced in a manner that violates the open-source licenses under which plaintiffs published their code."

That seems like one of the most important statements from the judge. Given this, the question then becomes how much responsibility Microsoft has, similar to any other software that can and do reproduce copyright protected material.

dragonwriter2• 3 years ago

You aren’t understanding the judges statement. This only means that the conclusion necessary is sufficiently related to the accusation that additional assertions don’t need to be in the complaint for it to be legally sufficient as a claim of violation. That doesn’t mean that the facts charged in the complaint are proven (this is about whether there is even a chance to do that), nor does it mean that if the facts charged in the complaint are proven, the plaintiff doesn’t still have to prove the additional issue. It literally means “they’ve said enough that the complaint on this point is not dismissed out of hand before even getting to whether it can be proven” (the vast majority of the case was thrown out – though, except for a couple points, with leave to amend, so they may be able to fix the deficiencies.)

belorn2• 3 years ago

It says "assuming the facts of the complaint are true". I think you are seeing misunderstanding where there is none.

The facts need to be true in order for the facts to be true. However, assuming the facts charged in the complain are true in relation to how it get reproduced, one can infer it will be reproduced in a manner that violates the open-source license. It is not making a statement about additional issues.

signa11• 3 years ago

pretty sure that new / updated gpl will be dealing with this sort of (ab)use.

dragonwriter2• 3 years ago

pretty sure that new / updated gpl will be dealing with this sort of (ab)use.

If Microsoft, et al., win this on fair use, there is nothing the GPL can do about it.

Using a license to constrain actions that don’t require your permission in the first place is ineffective.

GitHub, Microsoft, OpenAI fail to wriggle out of Copilot copyright lawsuit

Related Stories