8 ms·

Is not ok, but Microsoft couldn't care less (because they are not going to get fined).

blibble 3y ago
yes, because they don't indemnify their customers anyone sensible should stay the hell away from copilot until the fair use question is settled
- bastardoperator 3y ago
  Looks like they do. https://github.com/customer-terms/github-copilot-product-specific-terms https://github.com/customer-terms/github-copilot-product-spe... 4. Defense of Third Party Claims. If your Agreement provides for the defense of third party claims, that provision will apply to your use of GitHub Copilot. Notwithstanding any other language in your Agreement, any GitHub defense obligations related to your use of GitHub Copilot do not apply if (i) the claim is based on Code that differs from a Suggestion provided by GitHub Copilot, or (ii) you have not enabled all filtering features available in GitHub Copilot.
  - blibble 3y ago
    interesting > If your Agreement provides for the defense of third party claims do any of them? it also states: > You retain all responsibility for Your Code, including Suggestions you include in Your Code or reference to develop Your Code. It is entirely your decision whether to use Suggestions generated by GitHub Copilot. If you use Suggestions, GitHub strongly recommends that you have reasonable policies and practices in place designed to prevent the use of a Suggestion in a way that may violate the rights of others. This includes, but is not limited to, using all filtering features available in GitHub Copilot. (contra proferentem would apply though)
    - bastardoperator 3y ago
      I think it's pretty clear. If you're not filtering, you're liable. If you are and something transpires, they'll fight your legal battle for you which is probably better than any monetary indemnity clause. I assume this is for enterprise users where it actually matters.
      - bastardoperator 3y ago
        Looks like copilot is pretty upfront: Matched content: n ; Ap = A->p ; Ai = A->i ; Ax = A->x ; for (j = 0 ; j < n ; j++) { for (p = Ap [j] ; p < Ap [j+1] ; p++) { y [Ai [p]] += Ax [p] * x [j] License Summary This snippet matches 500 references to public code. Below, you can find links to a sample of 50 of these references. NOASSERTION (405) MIT (26) GPL-3.0 (19) BSD-3-Clause (16) GPL-2.0 (11) Apache-2.0 (7) BSD-2-Clause (7) LGPL-3.0 (6) LGPL-2.1 (3) File References Match Location Repo License ChRis6/circuit-simulation Unknown license AndySomogyi/SuiteSparse Unknown license ru-wang/slam-plus-plus Unknown license Cruvadio/invariant_measures Unknown license nishant-sachdeva/rrc-g2o Unknown license alecone/ROS_project Unknown license gustavopr/HANK Unknown license lcnbeapp/beapp Unknown license imod-mirror/IMOD Unknown license clach/MPM Unknown license MagicPixel-Dev/cxsparse Unknown license elshafeh/own Unknown license squirrel-project/squirrel_nav Unknown license lcnhappe/happe Unknown license cix1/OpenSees Unknown license pachamaltese/dulmagemendelsohn Unknown license gina10287/Interactive-shape-manipulation-FinalProject Unknown license GuillaumeFuchs/Ensimag Unknown license w2fish/CSparse Unknown license cffjiang/cis563-2019-assignment Unknown license diesendruck/gp Unknown license hendersk101401/jlabgroovy Unknown license robhemsley/SuiteSparse Unknown license Glaphy/Emission Unknown license Glaphy/Emission Unknown license daves-devel/ECE1387 Unknown license anranknight/TE Unknown license weigouheiniu/TE Unknown license Datoow/fm Unknown license chaoyan1037/openMVG_modified Unknown license cran/igraph Unknown license GHilmarG/UaSource Unknown license ZhaoqunZhong/Kalibr-ubuntu18-ros-melodic Unknown license hechzh/g2o Unknown license Open-Systems-Pharmacology/OSPSuite.CPP-Toolbox Unknown license elshafeh/own Unknown license yizhang/riotstore Unknown license sgalazka/porr_mtsp Unknown license skydave/sandbox Unknown license alitekin2fx/orb_slam2_android Unknown license Tianhonghai/vslam14_note MIT LRMPUT/PlaneSLAM MIT albansouche/Open-GeoNabla GPL-3.0 khawajamechatronics/mrpt-1.5.3 BSD-3-Clause 3000huyang/suitesparse-metis-for-windows BSD-3-Clause igraph/igraph GPL-2.0 LRMPUT/DiamentowyGrant Apache-2.0 kurshakuz/graduation-project BSD-2-Clause ghorn/debian-casadi LGPL-3.0 rmcgibbo/tungsten LGPL-2.1 Looks like this code in https://github.com/ChRis6/circuit-simulation/blob/2e45c7db01205f58a3f81455faf660aa8af2d7d1/src/csparse.c https://github.com/ChRis6/circuit-simulation/blob/2e45c7db01... is older then the GPL code in question or provided by the example. Uh oh, did we discover something? Who actually owns this code because this code predates the code in question by a calendar year using git blame, by a different author, and with no license attached to the oldest code. Is it possible the code in the codeium.com example is relicensed and not GPL code at all?

yes, because they don't indemnify their customers anyone sensible should stay the hell away from copilot until the fair use question is settled

bastardoperator 3y ago
Looks like they do. https://github.com/customer-terms/github-copilot-product-specific-terms https://github.com/customer-terms/github-copilot-product-spe... 4. Defense of Third Party Claims. If your Agreement provides for the defense of third party claims, that provision will apply to your use of GitHub Copilot. Notwithstanding any other language in your Agreement, any GitHub defense obligations related to your use of GitHub Copilot do not apply if (i) the claim is based on Code that differs from a Suggestion provided by GitHub Copilot, or (ii) you have not enabled all filtering features available in GitHub Copilot.
- blibble 3y ago
  interesting > If your Agreement provides for the defense of third party claims do any of them? it also states: > You retain all responsibility for Your Code, including Suggestions you include in Your Code or reference to develop Your Code. It is entirely your decision whether to use Suggestions generated by GitHub Copilot. If you use Suggestions, GitHub strongly recommends that you have reasonable policies and practices in place designed to prevent the use of a Suggestion in a way that may violate the rights of others. This includes, but is not limited to, using all filtering features available in GitHub Copilot. (contra proferentem would apply though)
  - bastardoperator 3y ago
    I think it's pretty clear. If you're not filtering, you're liable. If you are and something transpires, they'll fight your legal battle for you which is probably better than any monetary indemnity clause. I assume this is for enterprise users where it actually matters.
    - bastardoperator 3y ago
      Looks like copilot is pretty upfront: Matched content: n ; Ap = A->p ; Ai = A->i ; Ax = A->x ; for (j = 0 ; j < n ; j++) { for (p = Ap [j] ; p < Ap [j+1] ; p++) { y [Ai [p]] += Ax [p] * x [j] License Summary This snippet matches 500 references to public code. Below, you can find links to a sample of 50 of these references. NOASSERTION (405) MIT (26) GPL-3.0 (19) BSD-3-Clause (16) GPL-2.0 (11) Apache-2.0 (7) BSD-2-Clause (7) LGPL-3.0 (6) LGPL-2.1 (3) File References Match Location Repo License ChRis6/circuit-simulation Unknown license AndySomogyi/SuiteSparse Unknown license ru-wang/slam-plus-plus Unknown license Cruvadio/invariant_measures Unknown license nishant-sachdeva/rrc-g2o Unknown license alecone/ROS_project Unknown license gustavopr/HANK Unknown license lcnbeapp/beapp Unknown license imod-mirror/IMOD Unknown license clach/MPM Unknown license MagicPixel-Dev/cxsparse Unknown license elshafeh/own Unknown license squirrel-project/squirrel_nav Unknown license lcnhappe/happe Unknown license cix1/OpenSees Unknown license pachamaltese/dulmagemendelsohn Unknown license gina10287/Interactive-shape-manipulation-FinalProject Unknown license GuillaumeFuchs/Ensimag Unknown license w2fish/CSparse Unknown license cffjiang/cis563-2019-assignment Unknown license diesendruck/gp Unknown license hendersk101401/jlabgroovy Unknown license robhemsley/SuiteSparse Unknown license Glaphy/Emission Unknown license Glaphy/Emission Unknown license daves-devel/ECE1387 Unknown license anranknight/TE Unknown license weigouheiniu/TE Unknown license Datoow/fm Unknown license chaoyan1037/openMVG_modified Unknown license cran/igraph Unknown license GHilmarG/UaSource Unknown license ZhaoqunZhong/Kalibr-ubuntu18-ros-melodic Unknown license hechzh/g2o Unknown license Open-Systems-Pharmacology/OSPSuite.CPP-Toolbox Unknown license elshafeh/own Unknown license yizhang/riotstore Unknown license sgalazka/porr_mtsp Unknown license skydave/sandbox Unknown license alitekin2fx/orb_slam2_android Unknown license Tianhonghai/vslam14_note MIT LRMPUT/PlaneSLAM MIT albansouche/Open-GeoNabla GPL-3.0 khawajamechatronics/mrpt-1.5.3 BSD-3-Clause 3000huyang/suitesparse-metis-for-windows BSD-3-Clause igraph/igraph GPL-2.0 LRMPUT/DiamentowyGrant Apache-2.0 kurshakuz/graduation-project BSD-2-Clause ghorn/debian-casadi LGPL-3.0 rmcgibbo/tungsten LGPL-2.1 Looks like this code in https://github.com/ChRis6/circuit-simulation/blob/2e45c7db01205f58a3f81455faf660aa8af2d7d1/src/csparse.c https://github.com/ChRis6/circuit-simulation/blob/2e45c7db01... is older then the GPL code in question or provided by the example. Uh oh, did we discover something? Who actually owns this code because this code predates the code in question by a calendar year using git blame, by a different author, and with no license attached to the oldest code. Is it possible the code in the codeium.com example is relicensed and not GPL code at all?