I notice often on hackernews that people don't seem to understand anything about free or open-source software outside of the pragmatics of whether they can abuse the work for free.
But I'll bite: I know licensing, thank you. But what's copyrightable is not so easy. Licenses are not so easy. Copilot does not copy entire works and it's very questionable if a few lines of code are "piracy". It's a repeating discussion again and again, there's nothing novel about it except for the fact that a machine learns (and overfits for small portions of code). So please get off your high horse. I don't care for your fundamentalism.
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.
> 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.