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
Uh, vaguely? [Someone who isn't me] is aware of this happening at an american retailer.

It basically happens like this:

"Oh this code solves our problems and has a nice community around it for network effects!"

**developers proceed to adopt codebase without checking the license**

**months later**

"Oh, huh this license has some interesting language in it..."

Then the employee doesn't mention it; because the risk of having to re-do a bunch of work feels higher than the risk of getting in trouble for violating a license. Basically, unless it's Oracle; people just kinda shrug it off as a "wontfix".

My whole thing is that any system depending on people to read and follow a license is quite flawed in terms of enforcement, and is largely designed specifically so that powerful encumbents can make claims, not individual developers.

Laws have to be enforced or people will ignore them. If there's no practical way to enforce a law that doesn't involve violating freedoms - you're kinda fucked.