zlacker

Or just don't use Github.

>>nights+(OP)
Not using Github doesn't stop others from posting your code on Github with incorrect licenses. It becomes a massive game of whack-a-repo

>>TAForO+L
Or just don't give a hoot.

Takes practice, but it's a skill that can be mastered like any other.

>>nights+(OP)
This scenario is specific to neither github nor copilot. It will always happen for any combination of a code generating LLM trained on all publicly available code.

>>Vetch+11
Correct. All of those “models” are simply violating copyright - the post alone demonstrates that the model itself contains that code, so the entire model is also covered by that license.

I would put money on it also containing gpl3 code, which I suspect means that the model itself is probably also required to be public under the terms of gpl3

>>Camper+W
That’s why we should simply accept that companies don’t have to publish source when they include gpl code, right?

>>nights+(OP)
That doesn't help when someone else mirrors your code to GitHub.

>>Camper+W
This may be an acceptable approach if the code is not produced in a professional context and not of professional quality. One of the keystones of open source is professionals have had an ecosystem where they can deliver value to an open forum but still have at least a semblance of control how their contribution is used via various licenses they can select.

>>fsloth+T5
Sounds a lot like Oracle's justification for owning the Java API ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_.... ) in which de minimis things like variable and structure declarations were used by Oracle to justify a copyright-maximal approach that would have utterly laid waste to open source development.

The code in question is not something that anyone needs to own. Rather, it's what anyone would write, faced with the same problem. It's stupid to make humans do a robot's job in the name of preserving meaningless "IP rights".

>>happym+G5
But that's not guaranteed to happen and it still is a step forward.

>>nights+2F1
Indeed, not using GitHub is a step in the right direction.

What I am referring to is GitHub claiming that you are using their resources so they can break your license, when in fact you are not using their resources so they never made that agreement with you.