|
|
|
|
|
|
by icebraining
1791 days ago
|
|
|
Which repo marked as GPLv2 has been used on Copilot? I think the trouble is that some repos marked as MIT/BSD actually contain GPL code. Not that this excuses GitHub/Microsoft in any way, this was an obvious outcome and they're morally and legally responsible. |
|
|
It doesn't matter whether the code is GPL or MIT or BSD. If Copilot reproduces it in your codebase, you're violating the license anyway - almost all FLOSS licenses carry an attribution requirement, which Copilot does not and can not reproduce[0].
The difference between GPL and MIT is whether you have to release your source code, or just add a blurb in README. It's a big one, but it's downstream from the core problem: with Copilot, you won't even know when you're violating some license - much less what to do about it.
--
[0] - The whole point of a DNN model is to pre-mix the inputs in training, so that responses to queries are cheap and fast. This comes at the cost of making it impossible to reverse-query the model, so the only way for Copilot to give correct attribution would be to take its output and run a search on the training data, which would kill all the costs savings they won by using a neural network.