> How is this materially different from training a GPT on those same pieces of code, and then asking it to construct a scheduler?

I am saying sometimes GPT doesn’t do the thing you’re describing. Sometimes it produces exact copies of something that it was trained on.

When it does that (not a “superficially similar” one, but an exact copy) can OpenAI be held liable for copyright infringement?

Because it seems like they want to avoid liability on both ends. They don’t want to be liable for copyright infringement based on ingesting works, and they don’t want to be liable when their tools produces a *copy* of existing works.

I don’t think that’s an acceptable framework.