That is a matter of some debate among neurophysiologists and others. There are clearly differences but there also seem to be similarities that go beyond mere analogy.
That is a matter of some debate among neurophysiologists and others. There are clearly differences but there also seem to be similarities that go beyond mere analogy.
But even with the human mind, I am 100% sure Microsoft would not like it if I read their precious Windows source code and then go and work on wine, they might claim that I did not learned from their code but memorize secret algorithms , or maybe would claim that I did not ask for permissions first.
This is really different though in that this code is all open source. The argument is that sufficient code is being verbatim copies so as to be a derivative work.
Open source or proprietary you still have to respect the license.
>The argument is that sufficient code is being verbatim copies so as to be a derivative work.
Yeah, it also depends what derivative work means, I could make a script that inputs MS code and outputs it with obfuscation, is it derivative work or will MS complain that is not enough and I did not had permission to do this,
AFAIK code on GitHub does not have the permssions to be used as input for copilot, and not all code there has the permissions from all authors to be hosted there.
What MS should do is
1 use their proprietary repos as input too to show us that they think the results are derivative code
2 use their customer private code too to prove again that they are ready to prove in court that this is derivative work
3 open the model with no restrictions, then we could say MS is doing it for the advancement of society and sure charge for the service
4 promise to defend any developer in case their AI outputs copyrighted content.
>they might claim that I did not learned from their code but memorize secret algorithms
The difference is that you can't claim open source code is a trade secret that contains algorithms that you can't reimplement in your own code.
You can't use "trade secret" but MS Windows code is also no longer secret, they shared the code with third parties and was also leaked, so they can claim you do not respect the license or TOS,NDAs etc. Not sure if "secret" has anything to do with this, proprietary stuff is not secret, it could be source availleble or be a scripting language stuff or something trivial to find the original implementation like C# and Java
[1] https://opensource.com/article/18/3/patent-grant-mit-license
My main concern here is that copilot itself might not be illegal but that it is causing otherwise well-meaning developers to put themselves at legal risk.