• iortega@lemmy.eus
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    We need to start adding a new explicit clause to licenses.

    Edit: Although when uploading code to github, because of its terms of use, microsoft might be able to void any clause related to ML model training, with something like “when you upload code to GitHub, you accept that it might be used to construct data sets aimed at AI model training”.

    • toneverends
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      Really though, what is the difference between a copyright-infringing piece of code generated by copilot, and a copyright-infringing piece of code generated by running the original through rot-13 twice?

    • octt@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      This can raise some even more interesting questions, like: what should happen if you upload code that isn’t yours on GitHub, and the authors have never used GitHub?

      You can legally redistribute code released under basically any free license, but the ToS agreement that code uploaded on GitHub can be used to train the AI should be valid only if the account owners upload their own code.

      Can’t wait to use this loophole to legally destroy GitHub, but we need to find hundreds if not thousands of angry FLOSS developers that don’t use GitHub and want to sacrifice themselves for the greater good (you could just upload their code on GitHub yourself without their permission and only then get in touch with them, being it free code, but it’s kind of inappropriate in this circumstance)

      • iortega@lemmy.eus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        That depends on the new clause you add. Of course, it would not be permissive, though.