[an1sotropy]

If you know this area of IP law then you know that LOTs of licenses, copyleft or not, require attribution (which copilot never does, and can’t do by its construction), and you know that what’s problematic is when the model output is arguably not “fair use”. Examples of that abound.

You don’t need any fundamentalism to know that copilot’s output carries huge and untested legal risk. If this lawsuit clears some of this up, that’s a big win for everyone.

[RamblingCTO]

Yes, you're right. But my point also was that it's not so easy when it's just a few lines, isn't it? Especially since this is an international issue and the definitions of copyrightable work is not easily definable.

> You don’t need any fundamentalism to know that copilot’s output carries huge and untested legal risk. If this lawsuit clears some of this up, that’s a big win for everyone.

I agree with that! I also see this as the only proper takeaway that I think is ok. The rest is making money off this thing. But the US has a different law suit culture anyway, which I find weird.