Should GitHub be sued for training Copilot on GPL code?
&gt;&gt;a form of laundering open source code into commercial works<p>If it is nothing but a glorified autocomplete that inserts SHORT snippets of code, as in a quote from a book in a book review, or the above quote, that&#x27;s fine. But when it is inserting whole pages, that&#x27;s beyond Fair Use, and basically a nicely scaled and laundered version of plagiarism.<p>Another key is now much it is modifying the code to suit the situation. Is it generating entirely new synthesized output like DALL-E 2 or GPT-3 such that the output is closer to generative creativity, or is it merely pasting in code blocks found in similar situations?<p>It comes down to the question of how transformative is the output, which is a key concept in copyright law.<p>&gt;&gt;“What is the difference between this and someone doing it manually? &quot;<p>Another key question here. If it is merely cut&#x2F;paste beyond a line or two, it&#x27;s plagiarism, but if it is synthesizing new works, it&#x27;s good. Same as manually: am I using your GPL work for inspiration to generate new works, or am I copy-pasting pages of code?<p>Does anyone have any extensive experience with Copilot to be able to highlight these differences?<p>EDIT: fmt, clarity