[rnd0]

Not a lawyer, but additionally there's also legal concern about the legality of the training source. How can you verify that the model you're using wasn't trained and therefore incorporates code that is not licensed for sharing. e.g. someone theoretically uploading the shared source windows kernel to github and it being added to copilot.

There's no reasonable belief that or similar scenarios cannot happen and does not happen.

That's my problem with Linus's announcement regarding AI in the kernel -since the announcement I'm counting the days until we see SCO II Electric Boogaloo.

There's a lot of people with deep pockets and a deeper hatred of FOSS, and AI gives them the backdoor to take FOSS out -legally, on the grounds of province.

(I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and this is only my speculation from a layperson's point of view)

[EdiX]

> Not a lawyer, but additionally there's also legal concern about the legality of the training source

That's not how copyright works. If you use a pirated copy of photoshop the resulting image is not illegal.

[rnd0]

That's apples and oranges; a better analogy would be if you post a video on youtube that you made yourself, with products you're allowed to use, but happen to overlook that copywritten music is on the radio in the background or on the tv.

How many youtube videos have gone dark over bogus copyright claims over the years? And you think people will overlook what's in AI -when there's over a trillion dollars on the table?

[xyzzy_plugh]

If the resulting image contains copyrighted content, such as a snippet of photoshop's proprietary code, then it most certainly might be infringing.

It's not as simple as your reductive analogy. It's for a court to decide.