[Abroszka]

Exact replicas are an issue. If you are using AI image generation to replicate the near exact image, then that's illegal. But nobody cares if you copy a nice code pattern from a GPL code and apply it to your own code base. In the same fashion nobody should care if you make an image in the same art style.

[bombcar]

Inexact replicas are also an issue, otherwise there would be no issue with distributing MP3s of an Audio CD, as it's a lossy format that is only close to the original.

I suspect the courts will treat AI more like a "black box" - they won't care how or why your black box can perfectly play Metallica, only that it does.

[endisneigh]

> But nobody cares if you copy a nice code pattern from a GPL code and apply it to your own code base

this is not true, smh. See Oracle vs. Google.

[int_19h]

Oracle v. Google involved actual Java (declarations) code being copied; that it was a derived work wasn't seriously disputed there.

[endisneigh]

CoPilot will return actual GPL code verbatim.

[int_19h]

Yes, and that's why I personally believe that the model itself should be considered a derived work of such code. But OP was specifically talking about "code patterns".

[endisneigh]

Copying the code verbatim would fall under copying the code pattern. You talking about changing the name of the variables or something?