[khalilravanna]

> That's like saying that code copy/pasted from OSS projects on github was "written by the developer".

I don't think that's what OP is saying. What I think OP is saying (and I agree) is that submitted code is trusted if you trust the source. If you take the person putting code in front of you and ask "Would this person copy someone else's code and submit it as their own" and the answer is "No they would not copy code" then every step that trusted-person took to get to that code is immaterial. Whether they used StackOverflow or Copilot or whatever AI assisted code generating tools do or don't get developed in the future. At the end of the day a good, trustworthy engineer isn't going to use licensed software by "accident"[1].

1. I put "accident" in quotes because it seems so crazy to me that someone would start writing a method "doThing" and then CoPilot spits out a licensed implementation of "doThing" and the engineer would look at it and go "This seems fine."

[falcolas]

> every step that trusted-person took to get to that code is immaterial.

Which is, unfortunately, completely useless when it comes to copyright infringement. Trust in the individual will not change the output of an audit for copyrighted code, or the results from said audit.

The only thing that a "trusted" individual can contribute in a copyright infringement investigation is attesting that they did not know that the code they put in the codebase was copyrighted. And all that does is save the company from getting the higher "willful infringement" fines, if it should get that far.

Wilful Infringement Damages: https://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/jury-instructions/node/708