> A programmer can read available but not oss licensed code and learn from it. Thats fair use.
If a human programmer reads some else's copyrighted code, OSS or otherwise, memorizes it and later reproduces it verbatim or nearly so, that is copyright infringement. If it wasn't, copyright would be meaningless.
The argument, so far as I understand it, is that Copilot is essentially a compressed copy of some or all of the repositories it was trained on. The idea that Copilot is "learning from" and transforming its training corpus seems, to me, like a fiction that has been created to excuse the copyright infringement. I guess we will have to see how it plays out in court.
As a non-lawyer it seems to me that stable diffusion is also on pretty shaky ground.
APIs are not copyrightable (in the US), so Wine is safe (in the US).
If a human programmer reads some else's copyrighted code, OSS or otherwise, memorizes it and later reproduces it verbatim or nearly so, that is copyright infringement. If it wasn't, copyright would be meaningless.
The argument, so far as I understand it, is that Copilot is essentially a compressed copy of some or all of the repositories it was trained on. The idea that Copilot is "learning from" and transforming its training corpus seems, to me, like a fiction that has been created to excuse the copyright infringement. I guess we will have to see how it plays out in court.
As a non-lawyer it seems to me that stable diffusion is also on pretty shaky ground.
APIs are not copyrightable (in the US), so Wine is safe (in the US).