zlacker

>>davidg+(OP)
I think people may be drastically over-valuing their code. If it was emitting an entire meaningful product, that would be something else. But it’s emitting nuts and bolts.

If the issue is more specifically copyright infringement, then leverage the legal apparatus in place for that. Their lawyers might listen better.

This is not a strongly held opinion and if you disagree I would love to hear your constructive thoughts!

>>Waterl+Kj
I mean it starts like this, but if Copilot gets a pass, companies might just use AI as a way to launder code and avoid complying with Free licenses.

>>jacoop+1l
Having worked for a couple of big companies with IT, you should know they are effectively all breaking the law already in this regard (except for maybe hardware companies) because it’s basically impossible to enforce and no one cares.

The best way to make sure your code isn’t copied is not to publish it.

>>Shamel+9t
Can you name one of these big, rich, and careless companies, please?

>>drran+Be1
I can, roughly. One of the big international US based financial institution. Zero real concern for any licensing associated with software, across multiple teams I'd worked on in multiple lines of business. You find a library that works, you use it. Present in systems that touch dollars in the trillions per week.

I always found this weird while I was working at this company, but then, they have no reason to care about ephemeral threats that have never been brought to bear in a meaningful way. No consequences = no reason to spend literal billions retooling the entire tech side of your company over a decade.